17 hours ago, dc11786 said:

Patricia Englund's character Dr. Jamie Larson was said to be Scott Phillips' half-sister. Did they ever clarify if she was related to his mother or his father? I find it interesting because, while Scott wasn't present, family members from both side were. Scott was Suzy Martin Wyatt's half-brother and Ellie Bergman was Scott's aunt or cousin on his mother's side. 

Also, I don't know if the episode is online or not, I think it isn't, but there is an episode set in San Marcos in October 1985 with a postal clerk. The actor credited is Tony Rivera, I think, but I'm pretty sure it is Tony Shaloub. Has anyone else considered this before?

Wasn't it Patricia Estrin who played Jamie?

2 hours ago, robbwolff said:

Wasn't it Patricia Estrin who played Jamie?

Yes. Rod Arrants's wife. I still believe she got the job because of that connection.

1 hour ago, Paul Raven said:

Yes. Rod Arrants's wife. I still believe she got the job because of that connection.

I found out something interesting about Mary-Ellis Bunim when she was at SFT. Well, more than one interesting thing, actually. Apparently a lot was said about her & she was trying to make changes & they weren't popular & so a lot of stuff was said about her. And she refused to take up for herself. She just wouldn't address it & let it pass on by. Of course one of the things she wanted to do was to get rid of Joanne & Stu. And she didn't like Pete, thought Pete was an ineffective writer. And specifically told him to make the show sexier.

27 minutes ago, Tonksadora said:

I found out something interesting about Mary-Ellis Bunim when she was at SFT. Well, more than one interesting thing, actually. Apparently a lot was said about her & she was trying to make changes & they weren't popular & so a lot of stuff was said about her. And she refused to take up for herself. She just wouldn't address it & let it pass on by. Of course one of the things she wanted to do was to get rid of Joanne & Stu. And she didn't like Pete, thought Pete was an ineffective writer. And specifically told him to make the show sexier.

Did she?  Mary Stuart writes in BOTH OF ME that Mary Ellis cried when she had to take Carl Low off contract.  (He did recur for years though.) 

I don’t think she wanted Jo and Stu gone. Backburnered for Liza and her adventure stories, but not GONE. 
 

We can go after the execs (possibly MEB included) who wrote out Patti, Bruce, Eunice, Suzi, and Sarah (and never brought back Chris or Tracey) though.  Matriarchs need families. 

2 hours ago, antmunoz said:

Did she?  Mary Stuart writes in BOTH OF ME that Mary Ellis cried when she had to take Carl Low off contract.  (He did recur for years though.) 

I don’t think she wanted Jo and Stu gone. Backburnered for Liza and her adventure stories, but not GONE.

You could be right. She'd made changes & she might've settled for as much as she'd done. Part of it at the time could've been people just being afraid of how far the "new" would go. But, yes, backburnered as you say, at a minimum. And, there's no way of knowing what kind of marching orders she was under! They bring their choice in & then they present them with their mandates. At any rate I got a real kick out of this SFT "team member" marshaling a spirited defense of her when I had personally always been pretty dadgummed impressed with her. We ended up laughing. And she & Pete didn't get much time to work together because the Writer's Strike "struck"!

 

 

 

2 hours ago, antmunoz said:

 

We can go after the execs (possibly MEB included) who wrote out Patti, Bruce, Eunice, Suzi, and Sarah (and never brought back Chris or Tracey) though.  Matriarchs need families. 

 

5 hours ago, antmunoz said:

We can go after the execs (possibly MEB included) who wrote out Patti, Bruce, Eunice, Suzi, and Sarah (and never brought back Chris or Tracey) though.  Matriarchs need families. 

100% agree. it is a pet peeve of mine that happens in every show. Viable characters are dropped never to return which then isolates onscreen characters and we are left wondering why so and so never mentions a(previously) much loved family member.

In the case if SFT, I get that say Joel Higgins wanted to leave and Bruce was played out (for now) so yes send him and Amy out of town but don't just forget about them!!

Bruce could return a few years later recast , either widowed or divorced with new characters to interact with and straight away Jo has more to do. The continuity is not lost. And in the meantime, Jo mentions him so viewers are still connected to him.

Patti took too long to come back and should have been a little older. As much as I hate SORAS enough time would have passed for Chris and Tracey to be teens.

As for Eunice, they were trying to make the show younger and Ann Williams was probably expensive after 10 years but why not play the whole Jennifer shooting scenario but have Eunice injured but not dead. After all that trauma, she could divorce John and leave town to recover, leaving the door open for her return.

Same goes for Gary Walton. Left town and never returned while a slew of new characters came and went.

My apologies regarding Patricia Estrin. I was confusing her with Englund as they both appeared together on "Lovers and Friends."

Regarding Ellie Bergman, was she Scott's cousin or aunt?

Wasn't Gary Walton set to return in summer 1986, but Addie Walsh scrapped it? Gary and Laine's son Craig spent the summer with his Aunt Sunny, but wasn't that suppose to be the lead in to Gary's return. 

Erwin Nicholson and Paul Avila Mayer/Stephanie Braxton brought back Danny Walton and introduced Sarah Whiting in the same month. It was clearly a choice to give more weight to the characters. If the show was going to keep Tracey and Chris Whiting young, Sarah made sense, but the scripts sugggested they were both older. 

Patti's return in the form of Jackie Schultz is typical of that era where early 30 somethings were parenting characters in their 20s. It was such an odd choice. So much of Patti's actual generation was long gone though.  

9 minutes ago, dc11786 said:

Patti's return in the form of Jackie Schultz is typical of that era where early 30 somethings were parenting characters in their 20s. It was such an odd choice. So much of Patti's actual generation was long gone though.  

This reminds me of earlier when Millee Taggart arrived as Janet. In the 5 or so years she'd been absent she now had 2 children in their early teens.

Previously Janet had been roughly the same age as Patti but now was older. Patti was still a young married trying to conceive her first child.

Was the Patti/Janet connection played down to cover that?

I don't know why they created Sarah Whiting instead of just making her Tracey.

Did Patti refer to her children when she returned .How was their absence explained?

1 hour ago, Paul Raven said:

This reminds me of earlier when Millee Taggart arrived as Janet. In the 5 or so years she'd been absent she now had 2 children in their early teens.

Previously Janet had been roughly the same age as Patti but now was older. Patti was still a young married trying to conceive her first child.

Was the Patti/Janet connection played down to cover that?

I don't know why they created Sarah Whiting instead of just making her Tracey.

Did Patti refer to her children when she returned .How was their absence explained?

 

1 hour ago, Paul Raven said:

Did Patti refer to her children when she returned .How was their absence explained?

 If my memory is correct -- when Patti returned, she mentioned Sarah only one time, and mentioned Len only one time.  She did not mention by name her other children.   Does anyone remember if I am correct?   

52 minutes ago, Neil Johnson said:

 

 If my memory is correct -- when Patti returned, she mentioned Sarah only one time, and mentioned Len only one time.  She did not mention by name her other children.   Does anyone remember if I am correct?   

You are correct, although she spoke about Sarah being a foster child/adopted child.  I have the episode; I should rewatch it.  

Friday September 22 1972.

Jo marries Tony Vincente, her 3rd marriage and 2nd onscreen wedding.

Bruce Minnix performed the ceremony. An SFT director, he was also a real life mayor of Cape May NJ, so could do the same in real life.

Bruce Minnix wrote the wedding ceremony for Jo and Tony.  He did not play the minister who married them, Norman Rose portrayed the minister.  Minnix used the same ceremony for the couples he married as Cape May, NJ mayor from 1972 to 1976.

 

7 hours ago, hendersonite said:

Bruce Minnix wrote the wedding ceremony for Jo and Tony.  He did not play the minister who married them, Norman Rose portrayed the minister.  Minnix used the same ceremony for the couples he married as Cape May, NJ mayor from 1972 to 1976.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. Variety reported it in a way that indicated he was the one performing the ceremony.

That article lead me to a fascinating NY Times report about his involvement in the preservation of historic buildings in Cape May.

What is issue of Variety was the Minnix article in?  I would like to read it.  Could you post it?

 

antmunoz, neiljohnson.  Patti mentioned that Chris was in the army and Tracy Ellen was in college and living with her boyfriend.

 

6 hours ago, hendersonite said:

What is issue of Variety was the Minnix article in?  I would like to read it.  Could you post it?

It was in the Sept 20th 1972 issue in the News from New York section

'Joanne Tate, a role played for 21 years by Mary Stuart on Search for Tomorrow, will wed her third husband on Fri (22) show. The ceremony will be performed by cast member Bruce Minnix, who is officially empowered to do the same in Cape May,NJ where he is the real life mayor'

They listed Minnix incorrectly as a cast member and stated he performed the ceremony so wires were crossed along the way.

What puzzles me is why Minnix would have to write the ceremony. Wouldn't the official writers be able to whip up that scene? It's not as though it was the first wedding on the soaps.