38 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Holbrook got an Emmy later. 

She did, but her work in 1989/90 was superb and it should have been rewarded. She at least won an Emmy eventually unlike Carmen Duncan who was spectacular during the chief storyline and should have won. Too many Another World performers did not receive the recognition they deserved while lesser performers on other shows got in and/or won.

4 hours ago, chrisml said:

She did, but her work in 1989/90 was superb and it should have been rewarded. She at least won an Emmy eventually unlike Carmen Duncan who was spectacular during the chief storyline and should have won. Too many Another World performers did not receive the recognition they deserved while lesser performers on other shows got in and/or won.

The fact that neither Victoria Wyndham nor Beverlee McKinsey won Emmys is writ large in my Crying Shame file.

17 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

The fact that neither Victoria Wyndham nor Beverlee McKinsey won Emmys is writ large in my Crying Shame file.

Absolutely agreed....

The end of this promo is chilling, all the more so as it was not intended.

 

13 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

The end of this promo is chilling, all the more so as it was not intended.

 

AWFUL!! But what do you mean by "not intended"?

Edited July 16Jul 16 by Contessa Donatella

3 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

AWFUL!! But what do you mean by "not intended"?

It makes me think of when Jake raped Marley, which is two years away. 

19 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

The end of this promo is chilling, all the more so as it was not intended.

 

This is another example of why I loathed the character of Jake. He took over the show, and it became uglier and meaner. AW should have cut ties with the character when Paulina shot him. The show wanted us to root for a rapist (in 1990); I didn't have patience for that kind of thinking them and I especially don't have tolerance for it now. It's especially galling when they are telling the Sharlene/Sharly storyline at the same time that Jake is manhandling and abusing these women. It's just so ugh.

Edited July 16Jul 16 by chrisml

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

It makes me think of when Jake raped Marley, which is two years away. 

Oh, I thought that was what it was. I didn't even look at the date.

1 hour ago, chrisml said:

   This is another example of why I loathed the character of Jake. He took over the show, and it became uglier and meaner. AW should have cut ties with the character when Paulina shot him. The show wanted us to root for a rapist (in 1990); I didn't have patience for that kind of thinking them and I especially don't have tolerance for it now. It's especially galling when they are telling the Sharlene/Sharly storyline at the same time that Jake is manhandling and abusing these women. It's just so ugh.

And, I go immediately to my personal disbelief that Jake would have ever raped either one of the twins. Imagine my surprise when I learned that Donna Swajeski absolutely concluded the same thing. She & NBC had a war over it. NBC insisted that she rewrite the scene to have it be a rape. She finally relented but decided that she would leave when her contract came up & that is what she did, later. So AW lost her as a writer because some unknown NBC execs had a hard-on for violence against women, even telling a wild notion that violence against women increased the ratings substantially. Obviously an unproven statement where causation could not be shown. The other thing attributed to NBC at this time is trying to kget rid of AW by any available  means. They wanted the timeslot for some unknown soap they would own.

3 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

And, I go immediately to my personal disbelief that Jake would have ever raped either one of the twins. Imagine my surprise when I learned that Donna Swajeski absolutely concluded the same thing. She & NBC had a war over it. NBC insisted that she rewrite the scene to have it be a rape. She finally relented but decided that she would leave when her contract came up & that is what she did, later. So AW lost her as a writer because some unknown NBC execs had a hard-on for violence against women, even telling a wild notion that violence against women increased the ratings substantially. Obviously an unproven statement where causation could not be shown. The other thing attributed to NBC at this time is trying to kget rid of AW by any available  means. They wanted the timeslot for some unknown soap they would own.

Watching the earlier promo however,  the voiceover asks if Marley will give in to passion, but the visual looks as if she is petrified rather than wishing that she could be intimate with her husband even though he had cheated on her. It absolutely looks like Jake would rape Marley. And so would nasty pissy Jake who treated mentally ill Marley so harshly in 1999. And I understand that at that point he was reacting to the fact that she had recently taken Vicky hostage and he had been afraid for Vicky's life but that didn't make him seem less capable of being abusive or threatening.

11 hours ago, chrisml said:

The show wanted us to root for a rapist (in 1990)

You have obviously watched these more recently than I have, but I thought that Jake was pretty clearly a villain from his return in 1988 until after he and Paulina fell in true love in late 1991 or early 1992. He had cheated on Marley, tried to take custody of Steven from Vicky, blackmailed Paulina, and did whatever else he did to make it plausible that most of the women on the show would have been justified in shooting him. 

1 hour ago, Xanthe said:

You have obviously watched these more recently than I have, but I thought that Jake was pretty clearly a villain from his return in 1988 until after he and Paulina fell in true love in late 1991 or early 1992. He had cheated on Marley, tried to take custody of Steven from Vicky, blackmailed Paulina, and did whatever else he did to make it plausible that most of the women on the show would have been justified in shooting him. 

You're right in your assessment. I just ignored a lot of his stuff because I have never been a Jake fan. The character just irks me to no end. The problem for me is that the show destroyed Marley to prop up Jake. Heche and Wheeler created interesting versions of Marley (Buchanan was an awful Marley), but they had to be sacrificed at the altar of Jake McKinnon. The character has no redeeming qualities, and then we're meant to care that he lives?!? I didn't and never did. I've said it so many times, but I think the show would have benefitted from Jake being killed off and allowing the twins and Paulina to be spun off into other areas. 

The show was too focused on mean and vicious. It's why they go from Dack Rambo as Grant to Mark Pinter. Pinter is a good actor. I'm not denying that, but the more villainous change in Grant's character is emblematic of what I'm talking about here.

22 hours ago, chrisml said:

The problem for me is that the show destroyed Marley to prop up Jake.

Oh, I always think of it as Marley being crushed to feed Vicky. Jake cheated on Marley so that he could be in Bay City alone as an antagonist for Vicky. Marley drifted through Bay City so that Vicky would have an opportunity to impersonate her. Marley had fertility issues to raise the stakes of the custody of Steven. Jake raped Marley so that Vicky could utterly lose it when she found out about it. 

I don't know whether I would exactly say that Jake was ruined in the same way. It's true that he was originally essentially a good guy in order to be worthy of Marley. It was only when he came back in 1988 that he started to become actively bad -- but on the plus side at that time I felt the audience had permission to see him as bad. But they started to try to make him a good guy with Paulina and then ultimately made him Vicky's final true love without regard for Marley.

I agree that Grant as played by Mark Pinter was less sympathetic than Dack Rambo. If I weren't at work I would be trying to compile a survey of AW's villains and their levels of depth and humanity. Was Carl actually the longest-running villain the show had? He and Reginald were I think the most international supervillains the show had, sometimes to a ludicrous degree. Carl was given more opportunity to have human emotions than Reginald IMO. I don't remember Olive very well but reading the synopses she comes across as completely wicked with no redeeming features. Rachel and Iris seemed more rounded but again maybe that was also because they had more time to develop.  

@XantheI can see your point that MArley was used more to prop up Vicky. It's true the show favored Vicky. In the 1990 episodes I'm watching, it's clear Swajeski  adores Heche's Vicky.  I think bringing Jake back was a huge mistake. I don't think he's needed. I know there are Jake fans who adore Jake and Eplin, but all he's done is be a one-note villain for most of 1990. There is no rooting value, so I don't care about him. 

I can see why Cali Timmins was unhappy. Everything happens to her. Jake and Ken do things and she has to react to them. She is rarely if ever in control. Timmins is fantastic, but it was/is infuriating to watch her have to deal with this plot. I didn't like it then and I especially don't like now that I know she was unhappy. 

Again, I'm a bit surprised that I'm reacting the same way I did in 1990. I like much of AW at this point because of the performances, but the negatives (the Sam/Amanda/Evan/Olivia stuff, Jake, lack of diversity, etc.) never get better and the show only get worse with Holbrook going on maternity leave and Heche eventually leaving and being replaced by the awful (in my eyes) Buchanan. Rambo quits and leaves a big hole. That's compounded by Timmins being replaced by Judi Evans who does not play Paulina the way she is being written right now which makes it clear they could have written her the way Timmins wanted to play her. 

I also did not feel the show was making a rapist a hero. Although I think I am always going to prefer the version of events that Swajeski meant to be.

On 7/16/2025 at 12:12 AM, chrisml said:

This is another example of why I loathed the character of Jake. He took over the show, and it became uglier and meaner. AW should have cut ties with the character when Paulina shot him. The show wanted us to root for a rapist (in 1990); I didn't have patience for that kind of thinking them and I especially don't have tolerance for it now. It's especially galling when they are telling the Sharlene/Sharly storyline at the same time that Jake is manhandling and abusing these women. It's just so ugh.

I never want a “redeemed rapist” on a soap again. 
 

Honestly?  I never need a tape storyline on a soap again. Yes, it happens. But the social issue aspect of it has been addressed. 
 

1990 was only a decade after Luke raped Laura on GH. We all know how that turned out.  Jack raped Kayla on DAYS a few years before 1990. He’s a great guy now.  His longtime wife Jennifer is also a rape victim, which I’ve always questioned. 
 

Makes you wonder why some rapists were redeemed and some weren’t. Actor charisma?  Popularity?  Mark McCormack raped Mary on SB. She later died and he was not redeemed. But Dash Nichols raped Julia, was NOT convicted, and continued on the show. Her sister Augusta flirted with him. (Louise Sorel quit over this.)

 

Sidenote:  SB was the RAPEYIST show EVER. Literally every woman on the show was assaulted at some point. Kelly. Christy. Eden. Julia. Hayley. Gina (in backstory). BJ. Mary. Amy (impregnated against her will). I’m sure I’m missing a few. 
 

AW later has the tape storylines of Lorna and Toni before the show ends in 1999. Were there other tapes that decade besides these two and Marley?  I can’t recall.