Jump to content

Another World Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

 

Blackhawk was huge.  A multinational conglamerate.  IIRC, Steve's own words when he saw Rachel for the first time and explained what had happened to him.  They were into manufacturing, shipping, etc.  Then he got into other stuff like gold.  Basically everything he touched worked out.  I saw these scenes again in the last few months.  I was watching in 81 and have seen them since, but I remember the conversation pretty well since it was so recent.

 

Hard for me to believe Mac had that beat.  Mind you, I didn't tell you they stayed consistent about it.  If this was the case with Steve, why did one building going down, in the summer of 82, basically bankrupt him?  What was the name of it?  Something towers.  They had made a big deal that it was a huge project.  However, if the company is that big and diversified one building going down should not have wiped him out.

 

Frame/Harding was nothing.  That's Steve starting all over from ground zero again.  Eventually it grew after Steve died again, but in late 82 it's in it's infancy.

 

I didn't realize that Mac was that much wealthier in the 70s.  I could only watch around school then although if I came right home I could catch the last half of the Doctors and all of AW.  Sure wasn't watching every day, though, like in 81.

I remember the first Mac before Watson took over.  I remember seeing the episode where Alice overheard Steve and Rachel, thought something was going on when there wasn't and left town.  But day to day, no.

 

Anyway, I don't ever remember comparing the two as far as who was richer.  I thought Steve was pretty rich at the time. Certainly not arguing that he was as rich as Mac.  Again, I never really compared and don't remember the show doing it.  I know that Mac helped Steve get his money back after Tim Mcgowan embezzled it.

 

But in 1981 they were saying that Steve was pretty damn rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 13.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Carol Lamonte didn't die, she left Bay City in October 1976 after breaking up with Willis Frame, her lover after Robert Delaney dumped her. Her mother Therese was still living with Iris, and died in late November 1976.  I was probably too young to really appreciate her death scene, but it was  definitely a memorable one.

 

(Thanks to the Another World Home Page for refreshing my memory on some of the details.)

Edited by BuckyB12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I recently rewatched 1981 on YouTube and I thought the setup for Steve’s return was well done.  Alice had returned to Bay City with Sally then got engaged to Mac.  Jamie felt that he had been replaced at Cory Publishing and in Mac’s  life by Sandy.  Rachel was debating moving away with Mitch and was not happy about Alice and Mac being together.  Steve returned and caused drama for all of them.  If George Reinholt and Jacqueline Courtney had returned as Steve and Alice I think it could have worked.  Corinne Jacker replacing L. Virginia Brown as head writer soon after Steve returned wrecked things as well. 

Edited by Efulton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Had they got George R to return then maybe the story might have worked,Jacquie was popular at OLTL so wouldn't return but at least having 2 of the triangle long standing players would have been better. Tina Sloan would have been a better Alice than Linda Borgeson.

Alas, it was not to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Thanks. Did they present Rachel and Steve as if their relationship had been and was now true love or was it a mess of motivations? I was just watching Oct 1 where Mac told Rachel he was engaged to Alice and Rachel was completely ungracious about it. I assumed that we were seeing that Rachel was not perfect and that Mac was right when he said he didn't think Rachel was unbiased about Alice. That seems more interesting than the idea of the perfect love story of Rachel and Steve after years of cruel and unfair separation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That was one thing that felt off to me.  Steve doesn't choose Rachel over Alice.  Of course, this isn't the same Alice or Steve.  Still, I watched when there was no doubt who Steve loved.  But Rachel was also a heroine now.

 

I never got why Steve had to be killed again.  Just have him leave town like Alice did.  Diana had left town months earlier.  You break Rachel and Steve up and he decides to leave town.  They had a big argument over Rachel putting money into his company, without his knowledge, a few weeks before he died.

 

Lynda Hirsch wrote at the time that they did some survey and people wanted Mac and Rachel together.  Okay, that doesn't mean you have to kill Steve.  He and Rachel had just gotten together a couple months back.

This wouldn't have been like breaking Steve and Alice up, in 1975, rather than killing Steve.

 

I just think they closed the door unnecessarily.  Courtney came back a year later, maybe they could have done the same with Reinholt.  Or maybe not.  Maybe Steve stays gone for the rest of the show like Pat Matthews did.   At least they'd have the option, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You make an interesting point about killing Steve, although permanently sending him out of town would serve the same purpose plot-wise, I think you have to get rid of Steve in order to have the double wedding with Blaine and Sandy become a refreshing of the show.  If Steve was always around as possibility then Mac becomes a second choice rather than the endgame that AW lore posited him to be for Rachel.

 

I'm still amazed that they didn't kill off Mitch after his first stint.  As Matthew's father Mitch was much more of a potential threat to Mac and Rachel happiness.  However, as I recall, Mitch's return in 1986 did not have a significant impact on their relationship.  Rachel was annoyed by his presence, and it affected her relationship with Felicia, but overall Mitch's return was kind of a dud.  If it wasn't for his long lost brother and mother, I think they would have cut their losses and shipped him off to Africa much sooner.  But I am bias because I've never liked characters whose sole trait is that they are brooding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

In what sense? Steve was Jamie's father, so wouldn't he and Mitch be even in that respect? At least Steve never plotted to kill Mac (although I suppose Rachel had an extraordinary capacity to tolerate that in a suitor, all things considered).

 

I never much cared for Mitch and would rather have let Felicia keep Zane, at least until Lorna and Lucas showed up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You make an excellent point

 

I guess I was thinking of Mitch as a threat because he pinned for Rachel, whereas Steve dismissed her advances (except for his return from the dead, but I think of that as an Aussie doppelgänger).

 

BTW whomever made the point about the Blackhawk value being threatened by a single deal also made a great point.  Couldn't Aussie-Steve leverage his mansion in Bay City and a few of his daughter's horses to cover the loss?  On the other hand, I hope Cory Publishing eventually made the move onto the internet because Brava would be worthless today.

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

With Pat as Grace Coddington...

 

Iris 1.0 and Steve 1.0 were never financial wizards.  Steve needed John Randolph or Willis to manage his construction business and Iris used to hang around in a feather peignoir set until noon.  Neither character fit into the late 20th century yuppy business model.  But, it would have been interesting to see the interactions of their recasts.  An Iris/Steve pairing would have driven Rachel and Alice nuts. 

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • So Doug just leaves Vanessa there with Joey? He's a f*cking loser. Vanessa needs to divorce his arse 
    • Tina Sloan tied Jerry VerDorn record when Guiding Light was cancelled - 26 years uninterrupted 
    • Very true...but TPTB all were desperate to get into prime time or films and couldn't, so they looked down on their own industry and tried to infuse themes that just didn't work in soaps. I would have thought after 9/11 the shows would have gone out of their way to provide that warmth and comfort that the audience wanted, and to bring old viewers back. Budget cuts? Just bring back kitchen sets, both ATWT and GL got rid of those besides one each..(the Snyders and the Bauers) You don't need super fancy sets if you have the writing. 
    • LMAO they didn't 

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • LY has a job on another show. She's going to be on the Legally Blonde prequel "Elle" 
    • From what I can put together, the 1980s had several actors with interrupted runs. Michael Zaslow: 1971-1980, 1989-1997 Maureen Garrett: 1976-1980, 1988-?, ?-end Christopher Bernau: 1977-1984, 1986-1988 Peter Simon: 1981-1984, 1986-1996, ?-end Maeve Kinkead: 1981-1987, 1989-1996, 1997-end Robert Newman: 1981-1984, 1986-1991, 1993-end Jordan Clarke: 1983-1987, 1989-1993, 1996, 1997-end By 1989, I believe the longest-tenured cast member without a departure was Jerry verDorn.
    • I know they were popular, but once they tamed Van's shrew, I thought Billy just brought Van down. Since they had just Nola and Billy sitting around in 97, an interesting thing would be if they had developed a friendship that turned into something else while Van was "dead". Maybe Billy lives at the Boardinghouse (to work on repaing his relationship with Bill) and works at Company instead of the stupid diner. Nola and Bridget give him a job there and Nola and Billy (who had originally been a bit antagonistic) slowly build up a relationship and then Van returns. A returned new lease on life Van would return to her "high hat ways" and take on the Spaulding's for control of the company with Billy helping her behind the scenes.  I know that Jordan was on sporadically because of his issues and them not know if they could trust him not to fall of the wagon, but they could have done it slow..and give Van and Nola a new reason to get in each others hair (I love a good Van/Nola tussle.)
    • Congratulations to Coco Gauff on her second win in one of the GS tournaments, the French Open.

      Please register in order to view this content

          Perhaps it wasn't the most well-played match in history, but that's something no one will remember in a few years time.
    • The thing with Martin (for me) is that he should have been Anita and Vernon's kid. I honestly think he would have been fine being an older or younger brother to Dani and Nicole. It also would have made his relationship and kids feel more realistic. A handsome salt and pepper late 40s/early 50s congressman who settled down and adopted kids to fit an image for politics. Not that he didn't want this lifestyle but it is what he needed to do to get ahead. Also, we don't often get older characters playing LGBT roles not just on daytime but across most media. It would have been a refreshing take. As an alternative, Sam and Ty could have been Martin's kids from an earlier marriage a la the NJ governor that was outed. We could have also seen parallels between Vernon and Anita thinking back to how they handled Martin coming out compared to the way they accepted Chelsea.  As for Martin being Nicole and Ted's kid, I do wish in this case he was not tied to a marriage and kids, so that he could date and sleep around like any other character on a soap.  Yeah, I didn't get it...but what I did get is that girl is a bit crazy like her mama.  Vanessa and Joey talking about the poker table...get these people off my screen. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Unpopular opinion, but I didn't think the show should have reunited Billy/Vanessa at all until the final stretch of the show. When watching the 1989 episodes when both Vanessa and Billy return after being off the show... I liked that Vanessa had moved on from him and that the show was hinting at her wanting to reunite with her first love Ross while looking down at Nadine for being the one Ross was dating.  And I loved the twist where Billy and Nadine teamed up to keep Vanessa/Ross apart.   This was an interesting concept that sadly the writers dropped with the show deciding to make Vanessa pine over Billy between 1990 and 1993 when they finally reunited.   To me, Vanessa pining over Billy seemed out of character. At least once Billy was carted off to prison in 1994... she and Billy divorced and stayed divorced until the final months when they finally found their way back together.  During the years when they were divorced, I liked that they had maintained a friendship and connection.. with viewers (like my late mom) wondering if they would ever decide to make it work again. I wish the show had tried that with Josh/Reva because by the time of the final episode when they rode off into the sunset, I didn't care because we'd been through the make up and break ups between them for over 10+ years by that point.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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