Members Melroser Posted June 21, 2014 Members Share Posted June 21, 2014 I only read the first couple installments of that when it first started....just wasn't the same for me because I knew it wasn't the show or same people involved. Didn't they kill off Cecile too at one point? Prob one of my top five characters. Not to mention the horrible disservice that was done to Jake and Vicky on ATWT. They were my fave couple of all-time and to have the powers-that-be on ATWT destroy them was sad...in fact I didn't watch.....I wasn't one of the people that tuned in after AW. Instead I started watching OLTL because of so many past AW-ers and knowing Linda Dano was going on it. Robin Christopher, John Bolger, Kale Browne, and Tim Gibbs were all already there. I then watched OLTL 'til the end and the reboot. In my eyes AW's characters stopped when AW did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members robbwolff Posted June 21, 2014 Members Share Posted June 21, 2014 The writer did kill off Cecile. An absolute shame. The continuation has been hit and miss, in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members allmc2008 Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 How good was Margret DePriest for AW?? I don't know her style very well or how she was on other shows but I have heard her name. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members danfling Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 Margaret DePriest is a former actress (The Edge of Night), soap opera co-creator (Where the Heart Is, and frequent headwriter. I don't know why she was hired to write so many shows, because I don't think that she was terribly original or innovative. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Melroser Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 (edited) Wasn't the arrival of Mary McKinnon (Denise Alexander) and the "Sin Stalker" storyline done under her time? Both were great stories in the beginning but seemed to fall apart by the end. I also think that this was the time that M.J. turned out to have been a hooker in the past. I hated that story because I may have been in the minority but I had grown to really like Adam and M.J. and thought this was horrible to them. I wouldn't say the show was "can't miss" material but I do remember enjoying the show overall at the time. Edited June 22, 2014 by Melroser 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sungrey Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 I mentioned this earlier in the thread but I'll repeat the comments for those late to the party... I loved Margaret's two years writing AW in the 1980s. Under Sam Hall in 1985-86 AW was really bad, not to mention boring... Margaret restored a lot of the life the show had and really wrote some quality stuff. I know some people didn't care for the change in focus and the loss of characters like Larry, Clarice, Liz, etc... and I wasn't entirely happy to see them go, since they were a link to the golden age of the 1970s... but this show needed something. I thought the Sin Stalker was a decent story... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 (edited) NBC was climbing the ranks in the mid-80s so AW may have benefited no matter what, but DePriest's material did raise the ratings and likely bought the show more time. I haven't watched that era closely but I do think some of it works. I think bringing Mitch Blake back was a great idea. It's just that things like MJ/Adam and the misogyny of her exit story (and of much of the treatment of women at this point) bother me. I like MJ quite a bit and hated to see her leave on such a low point. I wanted to mention that AWHP now has some audio collections available for download as well. Eddie Drueding is asking for some money to help cover site costs, but it's not mandatory. Edited June 22, 2014 by DRW50 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members YRBB Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 It's been a while since I started watching 1981 AW but I'm glad more of those episode became available, jolting me to continue. About 50plus episodes later, I'm oddly fascinated by the show, at least on the writing part. Can somebody tell me the reception L. Virginia Browne's writing had from critics and audience alike? Doug Watson and Victoria Wyndham give tour-de-force performances on a regular basis (there's a particularly great one as Mac confronts Rachel about sleeping with Mitch and his tears keep building and building). Mitch is fascinating. I still can't believe, considering all the history they have, that Rachel chooses Mitch and leaves Mac. Or maybe it's because of that history. But the actor is intriguing. There's so many actors/characters that I just love. Other than Rachel and Mac, Ada, Liz, Lee, Jamie, Cecile, Sandy, Blaine, Melissa, Jason, Sally... and it goes on. I am stunned that they had Jamie Frame, such a legacy & important character, rape Cecile. I have no idea what happens to the character from now on, so it will be very interesting to see how they follow this up. I think production-wise, it's horrid (the lighting, those God-awful sets for the most part, actors flubbing lines, calling the wrong name, interrupting one another before the previous line has ended, etc). And Paul Rauch is supposed to be some producing genius? You can't tell from this work! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 Browne came before Corinne Jacker, or after? I think that period is all generally seen as listless and lacking stability. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members robbwolff Posted June 22, 2014 Members Share Posted June 22, 2014 I really enjoyed that period of AW. It was riveting at times with Blaine on trial for Jordan Scott's murder, the burgeoning Mac-Alice-Rachel-Steve quadrangle, and Cecile mixing it up with Jamie and Sandy. But then things seemed to fall apart rather quickly. I personally loved Vana Tribbey as Alice and was disappointed when she was replaced with the bland Linda Borgeson. I distinctly remember Corinne Jacker's name appearing in the credits as head writer circa November 1981. However, Eddie Drueding lists L. Virginia Browne was head writer from December 1980 to November 1982. Does anyone know the story here? Was she still writing the show during the period Jacker was credited? Also, does anyone know the story about Linda Elstad and her association with AW? In early 1984, Soap Opera Digest ran a story that Elstad had been appointed head writer but I don't think she ever served in the capacity. The SOD article mentioned a story she had planned for Donna Love where Donna was slated to try to gain access to a men's club that discriminated against women. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TimWil Posted June 24, 2014 Members Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) I distinctly remember Victoria Wyndham saying, I think on Entertainment Tonight, that her show was undergoing a "creative renaissance" because of Jacker. I think she and the rest of the veteran cast did feel the ship was being turned around after a particularly difficult period following the 90 minute debacle. I guess it became apparent this wasn't the case. I remember finding Michele Shay (Henrietta) fascinating but she just wasn't the right kind of actress for soaps. Her line readings were often very odd. Edited June 24, 2014 by TimWil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members teplin Posted June 24, 2014 Members Share Posted June 24, 2014 Jacker was definitely Rauch's attempt to recapture some of Lemay's magic. Like Lemay, she wasn't a soap writer -- she was a playwright. And she had some worthy ideas -- but I felt the execution was, for the most part, terrible. I remember being extremely bored by her stuff. But yes, some great performances shone through. I also agree that the show was terribly produced at this time. I was pretty young during the Lemay-Rauch years and I didn't really start to pay attention to the look and feel of the show until 1980 or so -- but my mind always flashes to this era when someone mentions how gorgeous AW looked under Rauch. Maybe it was in the 70s, but in the early 80s it looked cheap and felt shoddy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Melroser Posted June 25, 2014 Members Share Posted June 25, 2014 15 years ago today it ended .... Guess it's an evening of old clips/eps and remembering the good ol' days 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slick jones Posted June 25, 2014 Members Share Posted June 25, 2014 That was fantastic! Thanks for posting! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members YRBB Posted June 25, 2014 Members Share Posted June 25, 2014 Thanks! I can see both of what you said, especially the lack of stability. Even from week to week, the show seems to go from terribly exciting to snoozeville (although the acting remains good throughout). But it does have some great stuff in it and certainly blows most of current soap out of the water. Whether that's a compliment or not, I'm not sure. Glad to see this is other people's impression as well. I was trying to figure out if AW was great but a product of its time or if it genuinely looked bad. Which it did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.