Jump to content

Anthony Geary Bashes Wendy Riche's GH


Recommended Posts

  • Members

He did say:

Clearly it leads the reader to the assumption he was not happy with what was written for him during the Riche years.

I'm not putting words in his mouth and he doesn't need you or I to slander him. He can do enough of that on his own. I've only stated my opinion over and over of what I am picking up from him. It's obvious that we interpret things differently, but just read between the lines here. He's obviously insulting someone who did wonders for GH.

I believe Pat Falkin Smith once said "Gloria Monty is brilliant, but she runs the show like a tyrant." That I don't see as offensive. It was honest and tactful. I find no tact in what Geary said. That's how I am interpreting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Let me put it this way... It's only an unprofessional bash if you like the person that is being bashed and dislike the person doing the bashing.

I am sure if JFP were fired or Guza finally quit and someone else on the cast were to call it the Phelps and Guza Reign of Terror, there would NOT be this hypocritical debate. Whoever it is would probably get a standing ovation from the very same posters beating Geary over the head with their gavels of judgment.

After Wendy Riche was fired, there was a quote from the 2001 GH Fan Club Luncheon where Wally Kurth said something similar to Riche's tenure. Then, there are actors like Vanity Vanessa Marcil who said Wendy was "like a mother" to her.

The hypocrisy of the passion that fans have in wanting know what really goes on behind the scenes-yet-judges someone for telling tales out of school as being unprofessional really intrigues me. Especially when this board lights up like wildfire during the annual Gossip thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah. But...

That doesn't wipe out the fact that this id!ot Geary gave this shocking :lol: statement. Probably with GH PR department's help. And got what he deserved from SON people. Which won't mean much. I am more for: every case for itself approach. The point here is: did he say it and it wasn't true? And also: did someone say Guza & Phelps reign of terror and it was true. That's the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

My problem is that Riche has been gone for over a DECADE. He mentioned her in the middle of his big "thank-you" and it was so random. Now, I know TG has always looked down on soaps, felt embarrassed about his success in the genre. He strived for better once, long ago. I'm not knocking him for expressing his opinion. I'm knocking him for dissing somebody who, at the time, he couldn't stop going on about how great it was to work with her! :lol: I'm knocking him for randomly throwing that in there because it sounds like spin to prop up the current blighted regime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I've seen so many posters over the years who are bright, creative, well-versed in soap history, and who care deeply about the integrity of the genre. I'd put the shows' chances in their hands a lot faster than I would allow any of the "usual suspects" to take control of the dramas they've already helped decimate. When I returned to university in the 1980s, I created a bible for a new soap and presented it in my screenwriting class. It was in reaction to how badly I saw the network shows being butchered at the time. The creative process was thrilling; a total joy, and I still smile when I remember the positive feedback I received from the professor and my fellow students. I was used to seeing written commentary from professors on my work. This one wrote me a long, complimentary note on the final page of the bible, but also graded it 97%, A+. I was beaming ear to ear for days!

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Thanks. I do wonder if Rose was meant to be more given the caliber of actress they hired. I remembered Sara and Peggy staying longer as they were still on when Soapnet started their repeats. I wonder if that was part of the reason they brought Jake's brother in. 
    • Speculation about Missy Reeves' potential evolution on basic civil rights doesn’t change my opinion of her. My view is shaped entirely by her public social media presence—which I find unpalatable—and I have no interest in learning more beyond that. I simply liked Jennifer’s hair and dress. That’s as far as my admiration goes.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Cheryl was gone before Lemay came back but I agree with your thinking that he would rather a character from a family he introduced to the show than a family he did not originate.  I remember reading somewhere in the early 90's probably after DS left as writer, their was an either a writer or a producer who made a comment that their intent was bring the McKinnon family back to AW.  Would have made sense for the newer viewers from the 80's.  Much like Lemay's attempt to bring the Frames back from his writing in the 70's in his 1988 return
    • DePriest left in January 1988. According to the AWHP, Rose last appeared nearly a year before in February 1987 while both Sara and Peggy appeared as late as October 1987.
    • Annie was not brought in as an antagonist for Reva. Reva wasn’t even on the canvas when Annie first appeared in late 1994. 
    • The speculation……….very entertaining. 
    • I had forgotten that several Days stars came out strong against Melissa. Good for them!
    • That would have made sense. Did all these characters get dropped when DePriest left or had they already been dropped?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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