OLTL: Kyle & Fish spoiler

[Doyen]

God help us.

Summer 2009:

- Degrassi starring Starr and Cole.

- Morasco's in space.

- Getting gay with Kyle and Fish

Suddenly gives me a new appreciation for who Rex's father is.

[DRW50]

Surely this can't be any worse than the rapemance, Farah Fath spending months trying to learn a Southern accent, and Mendorra.

[All My Shadows]

Jared would have been perfect, IMO. His past still has so many blanks to fill in, and honestly, a long-lost gay lover is much more plausible than a long-lost daughter (looking at YOU, Viki...and YOU TOO Dorian!).

ETA: Is Claywell really a day-player? I've seen places list him as contract...

[DRW50]

I would have enjoyed a gay/bi story with Brody. That's what I was hoping for with Brody and Wes.

[MarkH]

That's just 'cause Brody is hot ! Nothing gay in his backstory.

I like him with Jess.

[Jehosefat]

I'm confused. What press release? Where is ABC 'trumpeting' the story? All I've seen so far is Nelson Branco's report, to which others (Perez, Towleroad), have linked to.

I'm relatively new to this board, and have been reluctant to share my opinions because of the knee-jerk cynicism that seems to accompany every bit of news (not to mention the snarky retorts generated by the occasional dissenting voice), but I'm putting my two cents in this time, because I think (based on the tenor of the comments thus far), the show is getting a raw deal. This story hasn't even begun yet. Why the rush to judgment? Sometimes I read these boards and think people must be typing with one hand and wielding a pitchfork or a torch in the other. The story has barely registered in spoilers and yet people are already complaining that it isn't on the air enough? Isn't this how stories are supposed to start? Slowly, and then build? Especially when the story involves two characters who aren't as well known as, say, Viki or Dorian?

While I agree that flaming the network it oftentimes a satisfying bloodsport, I don't think it's fair in this case to call out the show or ABC for some perceived PR slight when it's more likely that some setside source or actor got to flapping his or her lips at Branco. I think it's clear he broke the story long before the network was ready to. You pointed it out yourself, SFK. The point is to get potential viewers interested and to turn on the show. Any PR department would have dropped this news when the story is actually about to play out on air. Otherwise, why bother? That's why I think it's clear this was an unplanned leak of information. Granted, the lack of response from ABC speaks to a lack of readiness on their part. But who knows, maybe they're just trying to preserve some elements of the story? Already people on this board are speculating about where it will go, and how it won't be any good, because of this reason or that, and why? Because they read it in Nelson Branco's column! So many of the people who often call into question the veracity of his reporting now just presume that everything he's saying about this story is true? Seems weird to me.

I just don't get the comments that presume OLTL is going to screw it up before it's even begun. Nor do I understand complaints that it involves two dayplayers. So what? If people are interested in the story, they'll watch, whether the characters are new or not. Todd Manning was a dayplayer once. The Buchanans were the new family that came to town. Every character was a newbie at some point. Oliver Fish has been around for over a year; if people don't know who he is by now, they just haven't been watching. Why shouldn't the show utilize him? Admittedly, Kyle is new. But as such, he's a clean slate. The actors in question are, in my opinion, engaging and capable.

And you can't convince me that because two newish characters *may* be getting a story that has been slow to develop (to the point where it hasn't even begun!), veteran characters like Viki are getting the shaft. For that you can blame Rex, Gigi and Stacy: Of those, one has been on the show for seven years, another for two - only one of those three could be called new. Additionally, OLTL is among the few soaps that regularly plays its over-40 crowd. See Bo, Nora, Clint, Dorian (while Viki and Charlie have been backburnered lately, they have been A-players and likely will be again. It seems clear to me that OLTL, perhaps alone among the ABC lineup, values its veterans).

Finally, I think it deserves to be noted that OLTL has perhaps the most diverse canvas in daytime: it has a growing black cast, latinos and now likely gays (three, if reports are to be believed!), all cycling in and out of story.

All I'm saying is: Can we just relax a little and see what happens?

[SFK]

I hear you Jehosefat. But as I said in a previous post, there is something to be said about the many knee-jerk reactions of negativity, that didn't come from nowhere. Sadly, many soap fans have come to expect the worst after the many letdowns. If they are proven wrong by a great successful storyline, well then that's wonderful, but they'd prepared themselves for the fail. I know that's an awful way to look at things, I mean, why bother watching soaps then, right? But many soap fans have years' (decades') worth of investment and they don't *want* to give up their shows, they just want them to be good. And perhaps in this internet age fans feel that on some level their hopes and expectations will reach TPTB.

ITA with you that small roles have the potential to morph into larger roles. I mean, who knew Rex would become what he has to the show. And I'm all about introducing new characters, these shows become way too incestuous and tired with the same characters getting to play A-Z four and five times a piece. One might argue that it's safer to try out this type of s/l with dayplayers than say with a Buchanan/Cramer. All My Children hit it out of the park with Erica's daughter Bianca, where about 10 years earlier, OLTL decided that making Viki's son Joey gay maybe wasn't the best idea. Is it more "noble" to make a prominent character homosexual? Is it even a matter of being "noble" in 2009? Is it merely a case-by-case basis of where any sort of s/l fits onto the canvas? Is it de rigeur to tell a gay-themed story, or are we beyond that and just telling interesting stories that perhaps involve gay themes? Just throwing these questions out there.

I appologize if I misspoke about ABC promoting the s/l, though I'm sure they wouldn't spurn any free press they've received. I just think that given the Nuke and Otalia buzz, the Fyle/Kish (ugh, I hate these things) s/l isn't exactly coincidental. And that's fine, I liked Alexis Colby, and I liked Erica Kane, Dorian Lord, Myrna Clegg, Augusta Lockridge too. All I'm saying is, Okay OLTL, if you're going to follow suit just do it well, do it better, do something interesting an unexpected. And truthfully, I say this about ANY new story, regardless of the subject matter.

It really isn't my aim to be negative. Just like with AMC's "cougar" s/l, every now and then something will come along that "clicks" the analytical soap viewer in me who wants to take a closer look at the state of soaps and what might be motivating the telling of certain stories. I just want to be entertained, and when I sense that there are ulterior motives to telling a particular tale, like luring viewers by mimicking the reality shows or having a gay couple because gay couples are *apparently* "in" right now, I just want to rhetorically pick the writers' and executives' brains like they've rhetorically picked ours.

[DRW50]

I wasn't surprised that people would react badly to a new gay couple because they feel like a few other soaps having gay couples means it's about using gays as a way to get attention, but I think this was a surprising story for so many people to get upset about. I can't imagine the reaction if they had decided to make a core character gay, or put them into a same-sex relationship.

On a broader level, away from this thread, I've noticed over the years that there's frequently a strong resistence to the idea of gays having a major story on a show, or getting major publicity. You hear comments like, "Gays already had Will & Grace, that should have been enough!!!" Never mind that Will & Grace was marketed at straight women, not gay men, unless gay men want to revel in a show which relentlessly told viewers gay men could only exist or experience real love through their neurotic/sassy best female friends. I think to a lot of people, gays still don't exist as fully-fledged people, instead of some type of stunt, or accessory.

There's also an idea which often goes around which says a story where a gay man, or a relationship between men, is put in starkly negative terms, is great, because who needs all those boring gays or those PC types of stories. These days, a story where a gay man or gay relationship is presented in a negative way may almost get more positive reaction, because this is somehow seen as bucking a trend (I also wonder if it's one of the reasons that the Adam/Rafe spoilers, which were about a malevolent straight man using a gay man who has feelings for him, got a more positive response than Fish and Kyle, which are much more undefined). I just wish that all these positive, boring portrayals I hear about of gay men took up as much space in the media I read/watch as the more negative portrayals of gay men, or of gays and lesbians, or portrayals which paint gay people as some type of oddity. I haven't seen all these super positive portrayals since the 90s.

As for Fish and Kyle, I don't think ABC would care about marketing them. I think Frons probably only allowed two meaningless characters to have this story. The last time he had a story with gay men which was on the front burner, one of them had to be a closeted serial killer.

[leevo64]

I still can't figure out whether you all hate the idea of the story because it's another soap jumping on a bandwagon like baby switches/serial killers, or because you don't want gay characters on your shows, which is, well, too bad. We don't know anything about the story except for the fact that Fish and Kyle are going to be involved in some kind of story with gay themes. I can only imagine what viewers were thinking during the Carla Gray story!

[SFK]

Can only speak for myself, but just to be clear, I don't hate anything here. I'm just questioning/hypothesizing on some of the behind the scenes choices. But to answer your question, it would be bandwagoning that I don't like, I am all for gay people being on soaps.

Oh man, as far as I'm concerned, Carla Gray is on a WHOLE 'nother level. You could say that Agnes stole that from Imitation of Life or Pinky (her real inspiration was an interview with Eartha Kitt), but the way she methodically told that story and then delivered that powerful denouement, that's what I'm talking about when I say boldly going where no other soap has gone before, truly dynamic soap opera storytelling. And there were no spoilers, no tipping of the cards back then so there were no fans sitting around on their computers wondering if this "passing" s/l was going to be as good as Imitation of Life or Pinky. But the story WAS like those classic "tragic mulatto" tales, Agnes Nixon just brought new unexplored levels to it. She took folks on a ride and they had no idea where they were going until they got there. Believe me, I WANT to have that kind of faith in soap writing these days, nothing would make me happier!

[leevo64]

You're 100% right -- comparing a POTENTIAL Kyle/Fish pairing with the Carla Gray story is like comparing community theatre with Broadway But what I was trying to get across was that discomfort is often necessary for someone to come to an understanding on something they don't know.

By the way, the way you describe the Carla Gray story makes me wish there were clips on YouTube!

[SFK]

Oh no, I totally got where you were coming from. I was just happy that you brought up Carla because there's a perfect example of an awesome original take on a story that's been done before. I have my mother and Ellen Holly to thank for the play-by-play, I was a few years away from being born so like you I pray that we could watch it all over again on YouTube. Daggone ABC taped over all those old episodes, there's barely a handful of early OLTL episodes still in existence.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

No one has a Kish banner yet?

[MarkH]

Well, close...a Youtube channel anyway. But if it gets people enthusiastic, it seems like no harm/no foul to me.

[All My Shadows]

The foul is going to be if the story is complete crap, but certain fanbases praise it to high heavens anyway.

Seriously, though. I have absolutely no business being surprised that there is a little YouTube strand started already. God forbid these people actually watch the [!@#$%^&*] show and not just one storyline cut and paste together on YouTube. Half of the people watching that probably don't know anything at all about One Life to Live, but are gonna proclaim themselves these huge "fans."