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

    • When Anita read Barbara's letter, it started out with the viewers hearing it in Barbara's voice as Anita read silently. And then Anita saying the next portion aloud while Barbara's voice continued simultaneously. And then ending with Anita alone saying the last part aloud. Excerpt from interview  (link to full interview) The rest may be spoilerish -- Only the nonspoiler part here: I love the idea of reading that letter,” shares Tunie. “And at one point in the script, I think it said that my voice joined her, and [Anita] started reciting the letter from memory because [she] memorized this letter. I suggested to Steve Williford, our director, ‘What if it’s like that moment in Hamilton when Hamilton is writing the resignation letter to George Washington, and then he starts saying it too, and then Hamilton’s voice fades away, and then it’s all George. What if we do something like that?’ And he was like, ‘Oh, my God! I just got chills. Let’s do it!’ So, we did it.” I understood that it worked really well, so I’m really happy about that.”  
    • I think MVJ and Guza made a good team in the launching of the soap, and I'm hoping that the rotation of all stories and characters is maintained once he officially departs from the credits. And so far, Ron C's breakdowns have been decent... but they pop only when he's paired with a good script writer like Jazmin.   I hope once Guza leaves officially... that MVJ is able to reign in Ron C and the dread Jamey G.
    • I read that, but my interpretation was that she is uncredited because it is in a non-production capacity.  In others words, she's not secretly producing, or writing, as some had speculated prior to the confirmation. Her likeliest position would be in a post-production consultant capacity. I assume we agree on this?
    • Errol already confirmed she is back at Y&R and in a non-producing role; this alludes to she is not credited for the role she has.
    • I don't think Lisa served a purpose after the serial killer storyline. The writers never gave her anything to do but be Vicky's nemesis. Joanna Going deserved better. Another example of a character taking over the show and then the writers not having a longterm plan for the character.  Exhibit B: Sally Spencer. Such a missed opportunity. It really angers me how they misused her. She could sing and act and they just threw her away in that sexist nonsense storyline. Once the story was over, they wrote her off. The McKinnons should have lasted for years. I will give the show credit for how they introduced Sandra Ferguson as Amanda. I thought it was expertly done. She comes in and she immediately connected to RKK's Sam. She has chemistry with Matthew and she has realistic conversations with MAc and Rachel. That's how it is done. 
    • Great points, and it has not completely vanished. Leslie on Beyond the Gates fits the trope (she's still not over that Ted lovin' two decades later), though I will say there does seem to be an effort to make her more complex.
    • I understand why people speculate, but I have to say it doesn’t sound very plausible that Jill Farren Phelps would be working at Y&R in any uncredited role. CBS daytime shows are tightly bound by union contracts and corporate oversight, and that kind of informal arrangement would be a major liability in 2025. Before the mergers of SAG-AFTRA and the two WGA branches, it may have been easier to hire someone quietly or off the books. But those days are behind us. With digital payroll, tighter pension tracking, and increased scrutiny from legal and compliance departments, it’s just not the kind of thing anyone can get away with anymore. Most union members, especially producers nearing retirement, would not risk their eligibility or benefits to take an uncredited role. The Producers Guild of America is also very clear about crediting. To even receive the PGA mark, a producer has to be verified through a formal review process. According to their credit certification guidelines (source), "only individuals who performed a majority of the producing functions on a motion picture or television production" are eligible for credit, and those credits must be official and recorded. If someone is functioning in that capacity, they are not supposed to be uncredited. Studios that are union signatories, like CBS and Sony, know better than to skirt those rules. If anyone has a legitimate, primary source confirming that CBS is hiring someone like Phelps in an uncredited production role, I’d honestly be curious to read it. But without that, this just feels like rumor—not reality.
    • I keep thinking about the persistent trend of eroticizing mental illness on Guiding Light. Sonni and Annie were never more compelling, or more attractive to the show, than when they were manic. It played into a recurring theme: strong women undone by their unhinged reaction to sex. The writers were likely inspired by Basic Instinct and the broader wave of neo-noir films in the late '80s and early '90s, where female sexuality was often equated with instability. The result was a crude portrayal, not just of mental illness, but of womanhood itself. Both Sonni and Annie were introduced as sharp, capable women, brought in specifically as formidable antagonists to Reva. They were logical and composed, standing in contrast to Reva’s emotional volatility. That difference made them threatening, but not especially “sexy”—until desire became their undoing. In a very male fantasy, their strength unraveled the moment they slept with Joshua. As soon as they got a taste of Lewis lovin’, they spiraled into scheming lunatics, willing to torch everything to hold on to him. It was part of a larger trend in the culture. Fatal Attraction, Single White Female, and The Hand That Rocks the Cradle all traded on the idea that female desire was dangerous, barely held in check, and always teetering on the edge of madness. Looking back, it's a pretty grim trope. And while it's not completely vanished, I'm grateful we don't see it quite as often today.
    • Elements of it were silly, but it was a small price to pay to get Zas back. I should say there's a difference between in town and out of town returns. It's understandable for Roger to skulk around town in a bad wig and clown suit when he's in Springfield and running the risk of bumping in to people he knows.  Taking us out of town to find someone always has a short shelf life. Then it usually becomes about another character knowing X is alive but determined to keep them out of Springfield. Like Alan discovering Amish Reva. I don't know how long it went on, but it was probably twice as long as necessary.
    • Elizabeth Dennehy complained on the Locher Room about how ridiculous so much of the writing was for Roger's return. She laughed at so much of Roger's antics and how it was hard for her to take them seriously. Probably another reason she was fired as she didn't play the game.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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