Jump to content

Y&R/ Maria Bell losing their way?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I think that a lot of people are just as quick to Higlify someone as they are to Carlivatize them. Like you said, Greg'sGL, head writers will hit low points. The key is how quickly they dig themselves out of it, how respectful they are of the legacy they leave behind in the process, and how they find a way to turn lemons into lemonade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 225
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

That's a very constructive comment.

The thing that APPEARS to be happening is that there are a core set of characters for whom there seems to be a PLAN. For these characters, there is meticulous setup (Ashley's pregnancy; Mary Jane). It's clear we've been watching build-build-build, and there seems to be some sense of where it is headed. The timing of the ramping up of these stories makes sense too, given that we seem to have seen closed chapters on three stories recently (Kay's amnesia; Winters, Kevin's inner chipmunk).

But what makes less sense is that there seems to be a whole phalanx of other players -- many of whom are not "supporting" (or shouldn't be) who aren't supporting the key stories...they're just languishing. Obviously KSJ and Doug Davidson are the most egregious examples...

And so, the apparent ABSENCE of a plan -- in a regime that plans -- is confusing. At it leads me to feel there IS a plan--the Don Diamont plan. (Backburner, then quietly remove with relatively little fallout). I'm okay with that (the house must be cleaned), but I wish there would be a more proactive way to do it.

For example, with Davidson, why not have Paul pining for Cricket and pining for Ricky? They're both, to the best of our knowledge, in LA. Why not build a story that has -- as its happy conclusion -- Paul's reunion with his son and love off camera in Cali?

The recent casting spoiler in Neil's family makes it seem that we might be at the beginnings of a plan for him. I'm happy. A new job/setting (where he can be stronger than just Victor's acolyte), a stern "talk-to" who can help him recover from his moral lapses....I'm feeling it.

I thought Colleen was being positioned as a threat to JT/Victoria...but how can it be when all three of them are off shooting show/film after film? Then write them off. You cannot invest in characters seen only 3-4 days a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep, she was.

No, it wasn't. (Of course, the one misbegotten storyline people cite most - the Carolyn Crawford murder mystery - is one I thought was good, if a bit muddled.)

When Curlee and Marland told great stories, though, they were brilliant. I don't feel such brilliance watching MAB's stuff. I feel as if hers is more journeyman work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Good point, Khan. There have been a few stories at the start (Katherine's and Kevin's in particular) that I thought..."Oh, WOW. This is going to be great!" and they ended up good, but not brilliant like a Curlee or Marland story. You're right about that. But in today's soap climate, I believe that MAB is the best thing going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First of All Mark H! I am not talking about a week worth of episodes. I am talking about for the last few weeks. The show is BORING and losing it's way. It feels so off THis thread was intended to be about Y&R but some where along the way it has turned into a fued of some kind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • Members

A devious little bump :lol:

Here is what I said 5 months ago:

So, it seems clear that April was the transition point. By this time, the Kay kidnapping had dragged on a big long, and had descended into cartoon...and we had the birth of the Silver Chipmunk. The kidnapping didn't bother me that much because the original Clint-Morey-Lil kidnapping was just as nuts.

But yes, this time marked the transition into the tales that now grace our screen.

For me, though, this one sentence remains true--even now:

"I found much to admire, even in this week..."

See, that's true now. Even though I hate that Colleen is dead/dying, and Deacon has been made into a slimeball, and that the Terroni tale is a bust, and Victoria is like a wet dishcloth, and... I also think the writing and acting of Traci, Jack, Patty, Paul, even Billy have all been good.

But I also can't be help up as the "defender of the regime" right now. That's alphan's job (and even he's having a hard time). I'm not ready to torch the whole creative staff, but I wish we could return to the salad days. I wish I could feel and laugh and enjoy more consistently. But maybe that day will come again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, when we get a better and more talented writing team/staff in there.

It's been nearly a half a year since this thread was created, and this current writing regime has shown that things can only get WORSE with them. I'm not going to wait forever for them to find their groove again, which looks like it will never happen.

As I posted in other threads, the first 6 months to a year of a new writing regime is usually the best time. They're wrapping up stories from the previous writing regime and they're putting into motion storylines they've had substantial time to give attention to. HOWEVER, after that 6 months to a year honeymoon period, it's either sink or swim and they show you what they're REALLY made of.

Needless to say, this current writing regime at Y&R has now been there for over a year, and the past 4 to 6 months have been VERY PROBLEMATIC and things seem to be getting increasingly worse.

The "give it time" excuse doesn't work for me. How many years have people been waiting for people like Guza, Higley, Brad Bell, and others to get "better?" Has it happened yet? No.

As with those other writers, Maria Arena Bell, Hogan Sheffer, and Scott Hamner's Y&R has imploded and the show is getting worse and worse. You might find some little stuff to enjoy, but even you admit the show overall isn't very good and quite problematic.

Hell, Ron Carlivati might have faltered some last year, but he pushed through and saved most of his stories, despite interference from Frons. That shows real talent. Maria Arena Bell and Company haven't been able to save their worst stories, and they haven't shown me any glimmer of hope in MONTHS.

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 understand why people speculate, but I have to say it doesn’t sound very plausible that Jill Farren Phelps would be working at Y&R in any uncredited role. CBS daytime shows are tightly bound by union contracts and corporate oversight, and that kind of informal arrangement would be a major liability in 2025. Before the mergers of SAG-AFTRA and the two WGA branches, it may have been easier to hire someone quietly or off the books. But those days are behind us. With digital payroll, tighter pension tracking, and increased scrutiny from legal and compliance departments, it’s just not the kind of thing anyone can get away with anymore. Most union members, especially producers nearing retirement, would not risk their eligibility or benefits to take an uncredited role. The Producers Guild of America is also very clear about crediting. To even receive the PGA mark, a producer has to be verified through a formal review process. According to their credit certification guidelines (source), "only individuals who performed a majority of the producing functions on a motion picture or television production" are eligible for credit, and those credits must be official and recorded. If someone is functioning in that capacity, they are not supposed to be uncredited. Studios that are union signatories, like CBS and Sony, know better than to skirt those rules. If anyone has a legitimate, primary source confirming that CBS is hiring someone like Phelps in an uncredited production role, I’d honestly be curious to read it. But without that, this just feels like rumor—not reality.
    • I keep thinking about the persistent trend of eroticizing mental illness on Guiding Light. Sonni and Annie were never more compelling, or more attractive to the show, than when they were manic. It played into a recurring theme: strong women undone by their unhinged reaction to sex. The writers were likely inspired by Basic Instinct and the broader wave of neo-noir films in the late '80s and early '90s, where female sexuality was often equated with instability. The result was a crude portrayal, not just of mental illness, but of womanhood itself. Both Sonni and Annie were introduced as sharp, capable women, brought in specifically as formidable antagonists to Reva. They were logical and composed, standing in contrast to Reva’s emotional volatility. That difference made them threatening, but not especially “sexy”—until desire became their undoing. In a very male fantasy, their strength unraveled the moment they slept with Joshua. As soon as they got a taste of Lewis lovin’, they spiraled into scheming lunatics, willing to torch everything to hold on to him. It was part of a larger trend in the culture. Fatal Attraction, Single White Female, and The Hand That Rocks the Cradle all traded on the idea that female desire was dangerous, barely held in check, and always teetering on the edge of madness. Looking back, it's a pretty grim trope. And while it's not completely vanished, I'm grateful we don't see it quite as often today.
    • Elements of it were silly, but it was a small price to pay to get Zas back. I should say there's a difference between in town and out of town returns. It's understandable for Roger to skulk around town in a bad wig and clown suit when he's in Springfield and running the risk of bumping in to people he knows.  Taking us out of town to find someone always has a short shelf life. Then it usually becomes about another character knowing X is alive but determined to keep them out of Springfield. Like Alan discovering Amish Reva. I don't know how long it went on, but it was probably twice as long as necessary.
    • Elizabeth Dennehy complained on the Locher Room about how ridiculous so much of the writing was for Roger's return. She laughed at so much of Roger's antics and how it was hard for her to take them seriously. Probably another reason she was fired as she didn't play the game.  
    • Only thing I enjoyed was Abby / Olivia, etc., and the addiction storyline. Otherwise, I could do without the season.
    • Right? Vanessa had a ball gown for every occasion.
    • Roger's return storyline may have been silly but Roger's return was what lead to GL's last golden era.  It was the combination of Roger's return and Robert Calhoun becoming EP that got GL to finally hit it's stride after some really bad years. It will always disappoint me that the ratings during Robert Calhoun's run didn't reflect the quality of the show.
    • He also gave some of the best episodes, like the episodes surrounding Doug's death. The problem with Days was that Ron had a horrible vision from he top. I don't feel the same for MVJ and nothing that has happened in all these months suggests she doesn't have a handle on the show. Now if it becomes an issue I'll acknowledge it, but I'm not seeing it so far.
    • Jean Hackney was awful and that lead to Ben's exit story which sucked. I liked Ben/Val together. Val's love for Ben was that of a grown woman moving on with her life and Ben's love for Val made him willingly decide to raise another man's children as his own.
    • It wasn't just a GL thing, it was an 80s thing. Opulent party scenes on soaps were very big back then. Even in regular episodes where people are just going to dinner they're dressed up like they're going to see royalty.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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