Jump to content

Goutman continues to wear blinders


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Even Megan is a better writer than this. When someone sits on her. It bothers me how much horrible work she has turned out because there is some very good work which is ignored thanks to her crap.

Kriezman is just awful. He totally wrecked GL. He has no idea how to tell a story. If he had a strong EP, I might feel differently, but he doesn't.

I wonder if he will have Luke and Jade start hooking up. He did like the cousin love at GL, and this can be Luke's revenge because Jade runs Noah over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is Goutman's doing. He brought on JP because she's known in the industry as a very weak headwriter. He needed someone in that position who wouldn't butt heads with him. If he wanted a storyline, then he didn't want a strong headwriter objecting or standing in his way. It's how he's operated in his EP positions through the years. He always goes for passive headwriters. DK and LG are just glad to have jobs. They are in no position to rock the boat at ATWT. They fit perfectly into the writing team because they'll go along with whatever CG wants. They pretty much know the ride is over if or when ATWT is axed. The pathetic part is that P&G allows this nonsense to continue. Clearly they're not interested in saving ATWT or they'd hired a dynamic headwriter who would save the show. Look at what's happening with DAYS right now. They had months of horrible publicity when they fired their biggest stars (or so everyone thought). Everyone was pretty much writing the show's obit. But by bringing in a strong EP and AWH, they've begun to stabilize things. Nope, the show isn't perfect, but it's getting much better press now and fans seem to be happier than they have in awhile. That could happen for ATWT, too, if Goutman and JP were history and a new, strong team came on board. But like everyone else, what infuriates this soap fan is Goutman's "character" driven comment. ATWT is as plot driven at GH, OLTL and AMC combined. Pathetic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm surprised P.J. hasn't joined the convo. Maybe she's counting to 1,000 before she goes postal. :P

Yeah...my faith in this show was already on a downward slope. Now, it's at the bottom of a cliff.

Kreizman: GL cancelled under him.

Passanante: AW cancelled under her.

Goutman: AW cancelled under him.

God, this sucks. This really, really sucks. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Some time in 2010.....

Kreizman: GL & ATWT cancelled under him.

Passanante: AW & ATWT cancelled under her.

Goutman: AW & ATWT cancelled under him.

They're going to give Brown/Esensten a run for most cancelled soap (B&E have 3).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

^And yet for me, as a GL fan, I'm still jealous of ATWT :lol: At least they still have sets.

I still don't understand how ATWT could go from having people like Carolyn Culliton and Hal Corley on their writing team to David Kreizman and Lloyd Gold 8-9 years later under the same EP.

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, as some had speculated prior to the confirmation.  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