On 1/7/2022 at 5:58 PM, Paul Raven said:

Was amused by Connie Ford coming off all Helen Hayes of soaps with her 'Most of us are used to working in the the-ar-ter...'

At that point when was the last time La Ford had been on stage?

Did Lemay say that it was seeing Ford in a stage production which made him appreciate how talented she was and start writing for her more heavily, or am I just making that up?

I don't think you are.  I recall reading the same thing, either in his book, or in an interview.

15 hours ago, j swift said:

Donna is so interesting to me because whatever Depriest's original intentions were for the character, she became a muse for so many future writers who fleshed her out in other directions.

Donna (like Felicia) was created by Robert Soderberg. DePriest came in not long after Michael had been introduced and IMO weakened the character a lot even though she brought her to the forefront as a kind of heroine/damsel to the point where it seemed like Reginald's treatment of Donna was the reason for Michael's conflict with Reginald and Donna was just the object.

DePriest created drips like Cheryl and Dawn and Lisa. I am not sure whether she should get any credit for Anne Heche's Vicky -- as I recall Vicky spent an inordinate amount of time fretting over whether Donna and John were having an affair under DePriest's watch. I'm not sure any of Vicky's really interesting storylines started until afterward.

Of course I don't think DePriest did anything interesting with Felicia either. Even John Hudson, who may be the only character she created who lasted for any length of time, had a lousy introduction and was redeemed later (not in the sense that he became a better person, but in the sense that later writers did a better job of making him interesting).

All I remember Maggie DePriest doing with John was having him strut around shirtless and come onto Donna.

Edited January 9, 20223 yr by Khan

4 hours ago, Khan said:

All I remember Maggie DePriest doing with John was having him strut around shirtless and come onto Donna.

DePriest also set up the "no means yes" backstory with Donna and John that taints the material between them.

4 hours ago, Xanthe said:

Donna (like Felicia) was created by Robert Soderberg. DePriest came in not long after Michael had been introduced and IMO weakened the character a lot even though she brought her to the forefront as a kind of heroine/damsel to the point where it seemed like Reginald's treatment of Donna was the reason for Michael's conflict with Reginald and Donna was just the object.

DePriest created drips like Cheryl and Dawn and Lisa. I am not sure whether she should get any credit for Anne Heche's Vicky -- as I recall Vicky spent an inordinate amount of time fretting over whether Donna and John were having an affair under DePriest's watch. I'm not sure any of Vicky's really interesting storylines started until afterward.

Of course I don't think DePriest did anything interesting with Felicia either. Even John Hudson, who may be the only character she created who lasted for any length of time, had a lousy introduction and was redeemed later (not in the sense that he became a better person, but in the sense that later writers did a better job of making him interesting).

You're right - I don't remember Heche having much to do of interest until she moved across the hall from Lisa and started making a play for Jamie. To be fair, DePriest is the one who set up that relationship (with Rhonda Whelan's Vicky), but that's about it. 

I have a really hard time watching Anna's last months as Donna for the reason you give. She is incredibly, depressingly weak, to the point where I'm surprised she can even walk and talk. 

To this day, Jamie and Vicky's relationship seems like one of the most random things ever to occur on AW.  It doesn't feel organic at all.

18 minutes ago, Khan said:

To this day, Jamie and Vicky's relationship seems like one of the most random things ever to occur on AW.  It doesn't feel organic at all.

It's one of those very plot-driven relationships that is difficult to ever invest in. It didn't help that Laurence Lau seemed so ill-at-ease and also felt much older than his love interests at AW, for some reason. I think they could have done more with Rachel vs Vicky - that was the one part that had potential. 

11 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

It didn't help that Laurence Lau seemed so ill-at-ease and also felt much older than his love interests at AW, for some reason.

Between the stiffness and the extra pounds, it truly seems like LL was miserable on that show.

4 minutes ago, Khan said:

Between the stiffness and the extra pounds, it truly seems like LL was miserable on that show.

Did he ever discuss his time at AW? I have read bad reviews of it so many times in the past thirty years that I have to wonder if there was something else going on in his life or something BTS that explains it.

14 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Did Lemay say that it was seeing Ford in a stage production which made him appreciate how talented she was and start writing for her more heavily, or am I just making that up?

According to the ibdb, Ford had no Broadway credits after she joined AW. Of course Broadway is not the only theatre and Lemay mentions Beverlee McKinsey and Constance Ford performing in a play of his, probably in 1973:

Quote

Delighted with Connie and Bev’s spirited playing of roles not restricted by the inhibitions of daytime drama, I wrote scenes that brought them together on the soap as well.

But he had already admired Ford, the above was more about putting Iris and Ada together. 

During the first story conference, I protested that Constance Ford, whose talents are as impressive as those of Maureen Stapleton, Kim Stanley, and Geraldine Page in the theater, was wasted in repetitious scenes which demanded nothing more from her than keeping the audience up-to-date on what had happened to other characters during the previous week. The program supervisor from Procter and Gamble nodded in agreement, as did the others, but there was no real interest in specific acting abilities.

Edited January 10, 20223 yr by Xanthe
fixing quotes

14 minutes ago, Khan said:

Between the stiffness and the extra pounds, it truly seems like LL was miserable on that show.

I notice that Charles Grant (who I did think came across better onscreen than Lau at AW) also seemed more bloated and low-key there compared to some of his earlier or later work. I know that was the big coke era, but then I also remember some actors - Linda Dano maybe - talking about how lonely and isolating the experience could be due to how remote the studio was. 

7 minutes ago, Xanthe said:

According to the ibdb, Ford had no Broadway credits after she joined AW. Of course Broadway is not the only theatre and Lemay mentions Beverlee McKinsey and Constance Ford performing in a play of his, probably in 1973:

Thanks.

Edited January 10, 20223 yr by DRW50

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

I have a really hard time watching Anna's last months as Donna for the reason you give. She is incredibly, depressingly weak, to the point where I'm surprised she can even walk and talk. 

Reginald's henchwoman Gomez was making sure that Donna was drugged and confused and the performance conveyed both physical and mental weakness. I don't know when Anna Stuart decided to leave and whether she left because she wasn't enjoying her storyline or whether DePriest didn't know how to write the character out without making her feeble.

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

It's one of those very plot-driven relationships that is difficult to ever invest in. It didn't help that Laurence Lau seemed so ill-at-ease and also felt much older than his love interests at AW, for some reason. I think they could have done more with Rachel vs Vicky - that was the one part that had potential.

I was surprised that Lau was not a more appealing romantic hero because I had heard that Greg and Jenny on AMC had been so popular. But after Bekins and Yates he seemed uncharismatic and stodgy. Of course I also blame DePriest for making him a doctor. Joanna Going was charismatic but Lisa was saddled with a past rape and psychic powers.

 

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

I notice that Charles Grant (who I did think came across better onscreen than Lau at AW) also seemed more bloated and low-key there compared to some of his earlier or later work.

He was a lot heavier on The Bold and Beautiful (96-98) so while I don't know what he looks like now, I had always assumed it was just that as he got older, his metabolism was that of a thicker man who slowly got thicker.
And even though I liked Amanda/Evan on the first go, neither roles really recaptured why he was so appealing on EoN. Sometimes magic only strikes once.
 

Edited January 10, 20223 yr by FrenchBug82

3 hours ago, DRW50 said:

DePriest also set up the "no means yes" backstory with Donna and John that taints the material between them.

God, don't get me started. Sometimes I think DePriest's attitude to sexuality was more messed up than the Sin Stalker's. For one thing somehow the rape put Donna in the wrong and John was allowed to insist that his point of view in which she had wanted him was the correct one. For another it somehow was supposed to make John's relationship to Donna more significant because it made him her "first" lover instead of Michael, and there was also a huge significance placed on the possibility that John could be Marley and Victoria's father (including the mysterious photo that Reginald had showed Donna which turned out to be of John and apparently two infants as if that could be evidence of paternity).  

3 hours ago, FrenchBug82 said:

He was a lot heavier on The Bold and Beautiful (96-98) so while I don't know what he looks like now, I had always assumed it was just that as he got older, his metabolism was that of a thicker man who slowly got thicker.
And even though I liked Amanda/Evan on the first go, neither roles really recaptured why he was so appealing on EoN. Sometimes magic only strikes once.

I thought he looked slimmer in the face on B&B, but I suppose it just helped that he seemed to be enjoying himself more. It's too bad that was his last soap role. 

I haven't seen most of his EoN work but I agree that sometimes magic just happens once. 

3 hours ago, Xanthe said:

God, don't get me started. Sometimes I think DePriest's attitude to sexuality was more messed up than the Sin Stalker's. For one thing somehow the rape put Donna in the wrong and John was allowed to insist that his point of view in which she had wanted him was the correct one. For another it somehow was supposed to make John's relationship to Donna more significant because it made him her "first" lover instead of Michael, and there was also a huge significance placed on the possibility that John could be Marley and Victoria's father (including the mysterious photo that Reginald had showed Donna which turned out to be of John and apparently two infants as if that could be evidence of paternity).  

I wonder if the story would have been better if they had just done the triplets, if they would have never gone with Donna/John, or if that was happening anyway. 

4 hours ago, Xanthe said:

Reginald's henchwoman Gomez was making sure that Donna was drugged and confused and the performance conveyed both physical and mental weakness. I don't know when Anna Stuart decided to leave and whether she left because she wasn't enjoying her storyline or whether DePriest didn't know how to write the character out without making her feeble.

The sad part is even women who were not being drugged, like MJ, also felt very weak...to be honest I just came away wondering if DePriest hated women.