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

    • As I said in May, I have no problem with Martin and Bradley being married. You can still do all the fun introloper storylines with them as you do everyone else. Both men of a certain age, and it is very believable for them to have either a first love or have been previously married. And, you can do it without either of them cheating!  

      Please register in order to view this content

       I said something similar during the premiere week. Bill was the perfect age to play Martin as Vernon and Anita's child. I would've much preferred this version, but oh well.
    • I don't know how you want to count Maeve. She "retired" in '00, but would come back for appearances. I don't know however if she made an appearance in '01 or '03. In '02 I believe she came back for Josh and Reva's wedding. I assume she came back when Gina Tognoni took over the role of Dinah. And I know she was back for Ross' memorial service. Maureen Garrett was around until at least '00. I don't think Holly was in town when Ben returned though. I just got pissed off about Jerry all over again.
    • So, pretty sure Zaslow, Garrett, Kinkead, and Newman all chose to leave the first time. (If that's wrong, please correct me). Bernau - not sure why he left the first time. Was it voluntary? Or did they decide to write him out? They were writing so many out during that time period. It always seemed odd to me that they introduced Alex, FINALLY giving him someone he could talk to, and then he was written out. Or maybe that's why they made Alex his sister, so she could take his place as the head of the Spaulding family? Would love more intel on that if anyone knows. Simon - was he replaced by RVV? Or did he voluntarily leave the first time? It seems to me like one of those times TPTB decided to sex up or glamorize a character (and it clearly flopped). If he was fired, interesting he came back. Again, would love if someone could spill the tea. Clarke - I've always assumed he left because of his personal issues, but not sure if that was the case the first time.
    • 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.)
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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