Message added by Errol, June 6Jun 6

ANOTHER WORLD

May 4, 1964 - June 25, 1999 on NBC

Another World Discussion Thread

Followers

September 3, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-14.html

Replies 15.1k
Views 3.9m
Created 17 yr17 yr
Last Reply 41 min41 min

Popular Days

Posted Images

September 5, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-15.html

September 9, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-16.html

September 10, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-17.html

September 11, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-18.html

September 11, 201510 yr

Member

Glad someone repost this episode of Another World. Dare I say it but I wanted Rachel to punch the crap out of Jamie AND Mac. Even though Rachel was petty, she had good reason.

September 12, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-19.html

September 16, 201510 yr

Member

Director Melvin Bernhardt, who was Emmy nominated for his direction of Another World, passed away on Saturday.

September 18, 201510 yr

Member

Steve/Alice/ Rachel part 20

September 18, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-21.html

September 21, 201510 yr

Member

I was watching a Facts of Life rerun - the one from probably the second or third season where Natalie catches her father cheating - and they went to a fancy restaurant on Blair's dime. They kept thinking they would see celebrities. At one point Natalie squealed that she was sure she'd seen "Rachel from Another World." She and Mrs. Garrett squealed about how they should get her autograph. She came back a few minutes later (her time offcamera had enabled the scene where Edna and the girls saw her father with a random woman and wanted to hide it from her) saying it hadn't been Rachel, but the woman's life sure was a soap opera.

September 21, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-22.html

September 23, 201510 yr

Member

http://www.welovesoaps.net/2015/09/Steven-Rachel-Alice-23.html

September 23, 201510 yr

Member

The shame is that this 23-part series of summarys has entertained me more these few weeks than any soap on air has in years.

September 29, 201510 yr

Member

Create an account or sign in to comment

Followers

Go to topic listing

No registered users viewing this page.

Replies 15.1k
Views 3.9m
Created 17 yr17 yr
Last Reply 41 min41 min

Popular Days

Posted Images

Loving/The City Discussion Thread

The Loving casting director at that time was really pretty great, I think. That's one thing Loving had going for it for most of the 90s IMHO. This was great to see--I wondered why I loved Laura as Ally so much on Loving and The City even when I didn't love the writing... When I'd check her out on other soap roles (GL and GH) I seemed to like her less and less. I mean this is true of other actors who have just been in the industry a long time (in fact Heinle is one example... I've NEVER liked Benard on GH but find him charming as Nico on AMC...) but it really stands out to me for Ally/Laura.

And I'd agree with others that Jessica Collins made Dinah Lee, a character who as written often shouldn't have worked.

By EricMontreal22 · Just now1 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

Neither can I. Maybe Shannen Doherty...she wasn't doing a lot at the time...
That could make sense as a reason.
I haven't watched that period in great detail, the early period, but IIRC the only actual stories were Jocelyn being a hooker because she had been sexually abused, the transgender story with a dud actress, Jared being a horror, Angie and Jacob with a foster child, and Frankie being drawn into some kind of race war which led to the bar being bombed (I still don't know how that story was approved and I don't think it was ever mentioned again even as some elements like Jacob and Cassandra carried over to Angie's AMC return). At the time, Marlena de Lacroix said the show had baked a cake with no proper ingredients. (the opposite of an Agnes show, really).
The Masquerade story did seem to be their way of trying to reset and have greatest hits. The story got some buzz, along with Tracy's arrival, but I guess that wasn't enough.
Thanks for sharing the review. I see what Schemering means about longer scenes. I think they did get better at this (the whole Carly/Paul/Ava triangle is not a favorite of mine but there are some longer, beautifully acted scenes), but it was an issue. In some of the '80s episodes there isn't enough plot while by the early '90s there is a little bit too much.
I can see why they didn't want to lose Catherine Hickland, Philip Brown, Randolph Mantooth and Laura Wright, but I also would have been more likely to just go with Angie and Jacob if they were going to be drastic. If they were going to bring as many as they did I would have brought Ava over too - clearly they wanted Alex to get to have romance and so on, but Lisa Peluso could light up any scene.
Debbi was on PC for about a year and a half I think. She joined because she wanted to play a character who was harder-edged (I'm not sure if that's why she left but by the time she left the character had lost all edge). I remember a letter in SPW at the time from someone complaining that Debbi had been talking about wanting to play the first black bitch in soaps since she was on Generations, telling her that Diahann Carroll had already done that on Dynasty.

By DRW50 · Just now1 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

This part of the Schemering review stands out to me:

"We are living in the world of the one-hour soap opera. RYAN'S HOPE and THE BOLD AND THE BEAUTIFUL have recognized this by adapting themselves to the hour format within the limitations of the half-hour soap. They might open with a few teasers, but then wisely juxtapose quick scenes with long scenes, which allows for depth and resonance. Both shows often present very effective commercial-to-commercial scenes. LOVING would be wise to adapt this technique. The show is too choppy and the audience has little to savor. The constant interruptions when Ava spoke movingly about her miscarriage and the guilt she felt killed the flow of Roya Megnot's beautifully delivered performance."

Because rewatching 1994 Loving while watching the AMC episodes from 1995 that are airing here, one thing I've been sooo loving about AMC is just how long so many of the scenes still in 1995 were. And honestly usually very well written, so you have emotional if not story (but often that too) progress in every single scene. And Loving, though I think over all the writing holds up from 1994, seems keen to make up for being only 22 minutes by just having shorter scenes.

By EricMontreal22 · 5 minutes ago5 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

Right--I KNOW this is too simplistic but could it have been a case of "Well we still have to pay Dramatic Creations for another 18 months (or whatever,) let's give this new idea a try (and Dramatic Creations hoping against hope that it might extend their life at ABC further?)

HA I think it would be brilliant to do a spin off but with all characters from Loving that had been forgotten or were complete duds :D

By EricMontreal22 · 7 minutes ago7 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

Agreed with all of this. Again, I didn't have a history with Tracy Q (in fact the first time I saw her was in the GH episode on Daytime to Remember where she witholds Edward's pills, that aired between The City and PC.) So maybe if I did I'd agree with Khan that she didn't fit on The City, but I thought basically from her first appearance on she brought that something that had been sorely missing from the show, and Sydney never provided (to be honest, I barely remember Sydney's interactions with the other characters except for I guess her son Richard.)

By EricMontreal22 · 9 minutes ago9 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

I agree: "Masquerade" was just a nothing-burger of a mystery.
I, too, wonder if Agnes Nixon/Dramatic Creations played a part in ABCD's decision to make TC a continuation (of sorts) of LOVING. Like you've said, @EricMontreal22 , the network might've been bound contractually to launch the new show with characters from the old. (If that's the case, then maybe they were better off bringing back "Mike & Maty," lol).

By Khan · 9 minutes ago9 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

I actually don't agree there. I think they would have had no loss and only gained to bring over a couple of Loving characters but not make it a true spin off. Hell, maybe just Angie and Jacob--that way you still in theory would have still had some interest from what ever Loving loyalists there were... (I was still a weird teen and one reason I didn't watch PC, and not just because I wasn't a big GH viewer, was I didn't want to see Debbi Morgan as much as I loved her in a new role straight away--I wanted more Angie. I don't think she even lasted long on PC?)

By EricMontreal22 · 12 minutes ago12 min
Dallas Discussion Thread

Every time I watch the moments leading up to Victoria Principal's exit, I just shake my head and laugh.
And if you were to ask me to sum up the Jeff Freilich era of FC in one image, it'd have to be that car plunging into the waters, lol.

By Khan · 14 minutes ago14 min
Loving/The City Discussion Thread

I'm a big defender of The City but it's true that when it launched, they didn't really have compelling stories to launch it with, so pretty quickly (I can't remember HOW quickly) they jumped to the Masquerade (I think it was called?) serial storyline which was SOOO misguided on so many levels. Was this the network interfering saying "well we got SOME traction and attention from a serial killer storyline on Loving, so..." Was it just Brown/Esensten scrambling? (I would definitely ask Brown about this if I had the chance.) Because it was doomed to failure. The entire reason the Loving Murders were so unique was that anyone could die and we had some sort of history with these characters. By design, this is lost when you use it to really launch a new show (and did we think they were going to kill off Angie or Ally or someone else they had brought over from Corinth??)

And, like I have said way too often, it actually played better as a late night soap as KOMO in Seattle aired it in the end of its run--and maybe could have captured the new audience they wanted?

Now here's a weird theory I have. Loving was always owned by Agnes Nixon's Dramatic Creations company (her second--I believe OLTL and AMC were owned until 77 or so by Creative Horizons but I may have the company names mixed up.) What if ABC had some weird contract with them that made it make sense for ABC (despite the reported cost of The City) to play out that contract with a show--essentially a rebrand of Loving but maybe under the end of the same or a similar contract?? And then of course they pretty quickly just replaced it with their own show, PC. I have NO idea how any of this stuff works, but is there any chance that could be a factor?

By EricMontreal22 · 14 minutes ago14 min
Knots Landing

If Ackroyd had been available for KL, then it's possible the show would've remained very middle-class, as I can't see his Gary getting mixed up in things like Wolfbridge or Empire Valley.

By Khan · 18 minutes ago18 min

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Most Popular Posts

DRW50

Xanthe

watson71

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

DRW50

Xanthe

watson71

Important Information

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)

Chrome (Desktop)

Safari (iOS 16.4+)

Safari (macOS)

Edge (Android)

Edge (Desktop)

Firefox (Android)

Firefox (Desktop)