Jump to content

Another World Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 13.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

This show is honestly, sublime. Literally sublime. Sophisticated, psychological, a little dark, but not too much, little funny, but not too much. Perfect. It's always the too funny aspect of some soaps that turn me off.

So... YES. Officially back into 1989... Managed to watch November-December 1988 to catch up with all the New-Iris drama. I may stop again sometime soon and go back to mid 1986 to watch all the way up to 1989. There are ton of new episodes on youtube.  

Please register in order to view this content

 

Edited by Maxim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have mixed feelings about Swajeski.  It seemed she did a pretty good job while she was following Harding Lemay's storyline projections.  But as soon as she used that up,  the stuff she created on her own was very mediocre.  And many of the new characters she created were created around a gimmick.  Derek Dane was "beauty and the beast", Frankie Frame was a psychic private eye, Lucas was a reformed gangster, etc, etc.  She often gave her characters a gimmick that made them less believable.  Some of the characters out-lived their gimmick and became believable despite Swajeski (Frankie for example), but most of them did not.  Sawjeski certainly wasn't AW's worst head writer, but she was far from the best.  At least she stayed with the show for a relatively long time, and slowed down the merry-go-round of head writers that preceded and followed her.  This is all just my opinion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's my introduction to the show, so I must be very lucky then. Do you recommend I go back to 1986 (the first available episodes that can be called semi-complete year in youtube... 1987 and 1988 are pretty complete in various playlists...) to catch up to 1989... or should I just continue with 1989...? I'm debating myself what to do. Is 1986-1988 a good period?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wouldn’t recommend it.

But not because it was bad, but because there was so much turnaround from like May 86 to May 87. Literally half the cast was written out. It even confused me a little and I love AW lol 

1988 is a bit of a mixed bag too, because that year had 4 different head writers and the strike writers as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Then it's really decided... I am so obsessed with 1989 that it would have been harder to go back... and your response helped me decide. I'm sticking with the sublime 1989... and maybe if some day I ran out of episodes... I'll go back. I'm watching 1 episode a day... 2 at most, since it's sooo good I don't want to watch everything in just couple of months. And Eddie Drueding (GOD BLESS HIM, he's AMAZING) is still uploading 1989... 

Thank you for the advice @AbcNbc247

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In my opinion Donna Swajeski had 2 really good years and rebuilt & stabilized the show after Margaret DePriest gutted it. 
 

1989 was amazing partly because she followed a plan developed by Harding Lemay. Anna Stuart returned, the 25 anniversary episodes were great, Iris and Rachel were front and centre, Anne Heche was lighting up the screen and the Matthews were back albeit briefly.

1991 was must see.  Vicky & Ryan, the returns of Kathleen McKinnon and Carl Hutchins, Sharlene’s split personalities, the fallout of “Who Shot Jake?” and the introduction of Lorna Devon.

 

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

    •   It's just so much fun!   She really was what made the show come together. I remember thinking what a mistake it was to write her out temporarily. I wonder how I'll feel during this rewatch, but I'm fairly certain her absence contributed to the show ending after season 5.
    • Thank you @Paul Raven The Kay/Kill stuff sounds like fire.   @soapfan770 I saw someone asking about old episodes you had... in case anyone has old tapes but not a VCR, DM me, I am willing to convert them for free.
    • I think Krista is too hot or her. I think the current actress works bc she comes across so basic. Thats not a dig but she feels very normal and relatable as an average suburban woman. I think if Krista was in the role, Id want more out of her but I dont think Jan is meant for bigger things
    • https://www.instagram.com/p/DJogu0uJ7mE/ DAYS 9-25-90 First Day in Drag for Jack Deveraux who is allowed to be quite pretty. Matt Ashford plays him.
    • https://www.instagram.com/p/DJogu0uJ7mE/ DAYS 9-25-90 First Day in Drag for Jack Deveraux who is allowed to be quite pretty. Matt Ashford plays him.
    • The sad thing about SC being a great actor is that his character has never worked. Ever. And yes if I don't know what Liam is about and just focus on acting... I can appreciate him. But as soon as I connect him to Liam... I cringe.  Maybe SC should run till he is still young and find himself a role where he can shine. 
    • As I've said before I don't believe the fact that both sisters have cheating husbands (one in the past, one more recently) is a coincidence or anything random. It's pre-thought and pre-planned and the message is clear. Cheaters can be found in all shapes, forms and sizes. Some do it in the most blatant way, they are known serial cheaters and their wives know of their past hook ups (as Dani has already said... she was willing to forgive Bill for his previous mistresses... till Hayley came) and some are more masterfully disguised in the image of the perfect husband. The fact that Dani was jealous of her sister Nicole's happy marriage in the first episodes was not a coincidence. I knew it the first second I heard it. It made me wonder and think what is beneath Nicole and Ted's picture perfect life. The show painted two very different sisters and then gave them the same crisis. It was intentional and dramatically focused on how these women acted after that... How they kept or did not keep their dignity. The contrasts and the similarities are not random. They connected the two stories very well. Telling us that beyond the gates there are secrets... lies and betrayals. And sometimes the happiest ones have the biggest skeletons in their closets. Is all of this a cliche? A soap opera serial cliche? Yes. Does it still work? Yes. And did we need to start with something that is more universal and easier to stomach by the mass audience? Yes. This is only the beginning of the show in terms of stories and themes. We will have years ahead of us to explore different aspects of these people. The first couple of months it had to be a classic sex and betrayal story that makes more people hooked. It's universal. Again. Nothing so far about both husbands being cheaters is coincidental for me. It's too early for that.
    • Thanks, these are great! Joanne Curtis, another soap character punished for having an abortion
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Yes!!! Mona feels  like one of my aunts, love the way she carries herself. Loved seeing Eva pop-up at the gambling place.  Monday was all around good soap. Can't remember the last time an entire episode held my interest.  Loving the fallout and reverberations from Ted and Shea-Butter Sheila's affair

      Please register in order to view this content

      . Tricia Mann Grant is 90s early 2000s quality FINE. As nice as it would've been to see Anita embrace Eva, I'm glad she didn't because we can squeeze a lot more years of conflict out of Eva, Leslie and the Duprees.   Lauren & Sheila, Viki & Dorian, Katherine & Jill all gave us good conflict for decades. Hopefully this follows suit. I understand the concern. Right now there's an issue of quality of black representation on shows more so than quantity of black shows. I'd like to see more predominantly black sci-fi, legal, political, supernatural or medical dramas over the typical who is sleeping with who. However, this is a soap, and this is what happens on soaps. White soap characters do these things all the time, but have the luxury of being seen as individuals, not representations of their entire race. Husbands/fathers like Todd Manning, Victor Newman and Asa Buchanan cheat, lie and swindle all the time but aren't seen as a commentary on white men. Black characters like Ted and New Dollar Bill should be able to do the same.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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