Apparently, there were a lot of mistakes made at this time from JFP, her writers and the suits at NBC and P&G. Some people wanted AW gone, some wanted to turn it into a DOOL clone. What was the deal with that vampire story anyway? What was it about? Thankfully, it was pulled before it really took off. 

 

What surprises me is that one of her headwriters was Tom King, who was Harding Lemay's protégé and successor. He wrote some really good stuff in 1979-1980, and yet his tenure under Phelps was a mess. Was there interference from the higher ups or was King suddenly a hack?

 

Coincidentally, this is where my memories of AW begin. I was 3 going on 4 at the time, and I used to watch with my Mom and Grandma.

Edited February 22, 20205 yr by AbcNbc247

8 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

My apologies for dissing  Ms JFP - I had my timelines mixed up. She did kill off Bridget but later teams put older characters on recurring and then wrote them off.

Mind you JFP did plenty of other stuff she could be criticized for -  AW- ER/BCPD Blue...

The link @DRW50 provided to the AWHP does talk about JFP's treatment of older characters:

 

JFP eliminated multigenerational stories by firing all the actors over 55: Bridget (a beloved 11-year vet), Clara (shamelessly carted off to the old folks home), Spencer (even though he was an integral part of the Justine, then the Ryan/Grant story) and Eddie (thus reducing Joe to the role of heavy in the Nick/Sofia story).

10 hours ago, Khan said:

 

Maybe not, but the audience loved those actors (and others) very much.

 Exactly Khan.  Soaps need multi-generational characters and supporting actors.  Bridget had an important role to play as the one constant in Vicky's life and she also had great relationships with Donna, Michael and especially Jake.

10 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Apparently even Jensen Buchanan said she wanted Bridget back of any character.

 

1 hour ago, Efulton said:

Bridget had an important role to play as the one constant in Vicky's life and she also had great relationships with Donna, Michael and especially Jake.

 

When you have a character like Vicky -- who could be a heroine, a bitch or both, depending on the circumstances -- you have to have someone like Bridget as a "talk-to" for her, in order for the audience to understand her motivations, as well to serve as a surrogate for the audience, giving her a shot of the truth when it's called for.  Otherwise, there's the danger of her coming across as too arch or unsympathetic.

 

Of course, once Jensen Buchanan's Vicky basically became all heroine, losing her edge from before, you no longer needed Bridget to explain her to the audience.  (Same for Ada, I guess, as Rachel evolved from villain to the show's central character).  Nevertheless, Bridget still served a purpose -- just as you've described, @Efulton -- as a constant presence in Vicky's life, and a reminder of how much she had evolved over the years.

Edited February 22, 20205 yr by Khan

58 minutes ago, Khan said:

 

 

When you have a character like Vicky -- who could be a heroine, a bitch or both, depending on the circumstances -- you have to have someone like Bridget as a "talk-to" for her, in order for the audience to understand her motivations, as well to serve as a surrogate for the audience, giving her a shot of the truth when it's called for.  Otherwise, there's the danger of her coming across as too arch or unsympathetic.

 

Of course, once Jensen Buchanan's Vicky basically became all heroine, losing her edge from before, you no longer needed Bridget to explain her to the audience.  (Same for Ada, I guess, as Rachel evolved from villain to the show's central character).  Nevertheless, Bridget still served a purpose -- just as you've described, @Efulton -- as a constant presence in Vicky's life, and a reminder of how much she had evolved over the years.

 

Bridget was certainly always a supporting character, never really had any desires of her own. I don't know if it was ever clearly defined when Vicky's adoptive parents (Grace and Philip Carson) were supposed to have died. On the one hand it was supposed to explain why Vicky had been raised poor and was so close to Bridget, but on the other Vicky treated Bridget more like a servant than a parent. That suggests to me that Vicky must have been old enough to think of Bridget as an employee before she lost the Carsons.

 

Ada was a more fully-realized character and had her own storylines independent of Rachel from time to time.

Till the mid 80s, Ada had her own stories and marriages..once she moved in with the Cory's..she became more supporting..but she co owned Mary's and than Paradise Cafe..plus had a brief fling with her old high school flame..who called her 'bubbles'.

 

Rachel lost her sarcastic edge and drive once JFP took over.  Oddly, she was the bright spot in the Jordan Stark story.  She was again Rachel..with drive, saracism, and also lost the weird accent she adopted.

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

Till the mid 80s, Ada had her own stories and marriages..once she moved in with the Cory's..she became more supporting..but she co owned Mary's and than Paradise Cafe..plus had a brief fling with her old high school flame..who called her 'bubbles'.

 

Rachel lost her sarcastic edge and drive once JFP took over.  Oddly, she was the bright spot in the Jordan Stark story.  She was again Rachel..with drive, saracism, and also lost the weird accent she adopted.

 

Did Rachel lose the accent?  I don't remember that.  But that accent was weird as Hell.  What in the world was VW thinking?  Nobody picks up a British accent in middle-age.  Didn't that show have any directors?  

 

Also, Ada dating her high school sweetheart was a continuity error, because Ada and Rachel hadn't lived in Bay City until they moved there in 1967-68.  Ada certainly didn't go to school there.  In fact originally, Ada was from the South and even had a southern accent briefly.   Although I wasn't watching, if you read the scripts, she seems a bit like Opal Gardner during the first few weeks.  But then the writers began to write to Connie Ford's strengths, and she made the character her own.   

57 minutes ago, Neil Johnson said:

 

Did Rachel lose the accent?  I don't remember that.  But that accent was weird as Hell.  What in the world was VW thinking?  Nobody picks up a British accent in middle-age.  Didn't that show have any directors?  

 

I guess we were supposed to assume Rachel got it from her nationwide tours of Couplets with Carl. 

Don't quote me on this, but I think I've read somewhere that Victoria Wyndham developed that strange accent out of boredom, and the fact that neither the directors nor "the suits" called her on it proved her point about how neglected the show had become.

56 minutes ago, Khan said:

Don't quote me on this, but I think I've read somewhere that Victoria Wyndham developed that strange accent out of boredom, and the fact that neither the directors nor "the suits" called her on it proved her point about how neglected the show had become.

i would not be least bit surprised if this was true.  

Picking-up a sudden speech affectation in adulthood is a sign of emotional instability.  I'm not saying that's the reason VW did it, but any other reason I can think of is even more disturbing.  

My assumption was always that VW's late-in-life Brit accent was a character choice reflecting Rachel's closeness with Carl. But it wouldn't surprise me if it was a combination of boredom and a passive/aggressive stab at NBC. 

 

I thought Rachel was, generally, competently written during Swajeski's tenure as HW, but the difference here, in Lemay's brief return, is tremendous. Rachel is so incredibly layered and even what could have been an everyday mother-daughter chat comes alive. It reminds me of another fantastic scene she had in his return she she tore Liz up for accidentally telling Matt about the circumstances of his conception. I truly do mourn what we never got to see with a longer Lemay stint. 

6 hours ago, DRW50 said:

 

I thought Rachel was, generally, competently written during Swajeski's tenure as HW, but the difference here, in Lemay's brief return, is tremendous. Rachel is so incredibly layered and even what could have been an everyday mother-daughter chat comes alive. 

Was the koi pond incident Rachel describes a real on-screen event? 

2 hours ago, Xanthe said:

Was the koi pond incident Rachel describes a real on-screen event? 

 

No, that never really occurred in the 1970s or early 80s.  But I guess it illustrated their strange relationship, and the ways Mac almost always forgave Iris's tricks.