Jump to content

Guiding Light Discussion Thread


Paul Raven

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Don't know if that's true, but that would have been a mistake even knowing what they got instead. Laibson's GL was far too dark and mean-spirited for my taste. And it was under him we lost the wonderful young actors who portrayed Michelle and Bill and that was around the time GL lost that wonderful umbrella community feel that made it so wonderful from about 1987-1994.

GL never recovered from Laibson, in my opinion and then it just got worse with Rauch and Conboy and, of course, Wheeler (who at least cared).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

When GL dumped Rachel Miner, ATWT also did something similar, so people thought it was a P&G thing.

Laibson was paired with McTavish, at AW he did do a show with a sense of community so I don't know how much was on her being the writer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

IMO, the last "good" EP GUIDING LIGHT had was Robert Calhoun. I realize his successor, JFP, oversaw GL through its' final "golden era" of the early- and mid-'90's. However, it was also during JFP's regime when we saw the departures of Ellen Parker and, most notably, Beverlee McKinsey -- two exits that, IMO, would prove costly in the long run. Moreover, there was an almost unseemly amount of turnover on the writing team under her watch, resulting in instability and weakened ratings. If the latter part of JFP's time had been more stable in the writing department, I believe, we never would have experienced the disaster that was McTavish/Laibson.

OTOH, Calhoun was there at a critical time for the show, as Kim Zimmer was on her way out. Although it might be exaggerating to say GL had become "The Reva Show," I WOULD argue that it had become a bit too reliant on KZ (and on Reva) to carry itself. Calhoun changed that dynamic, refocusing and restructuring GL into the most ensemble-driven show it had been since the "Four Musketeers" era. All the major families -- the Bauers, the Lewises and Shaynes, the Spauldings and Chamberlains, and so on -- were kept "alive" in major, ongoing, umbrella stories that played on history and never alienated (or seemed to alienate) this-or-that audience group. More importantly, Calhoun was the one who promoted Nancy Curlee to Co-HW (w/ Pam Long) who, in turn, spearheaded the returns of Michael Zaslow and Maureen Garrett -- probably the smartest moves GL could have made at that point in its run.

If anything, I think JFP coasted on Calhoun's successful, but brief, tenure, using elements he had set in place to keep the show going into the mid-'90's. It's only when she began augmenting those elements -- killing off Maureen, allowing Bev McKinsey to slip out the door, introducing several rather polarizing actors and characters (I'm not naming names) -- that she began encountering problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

For me, the last good EP was Jill Farren F*ckUp because I started to watch the show during her reign as a young child in the early 90s. While Jill has many duds as Khan stated, I think that GL 91-94 was some of the best soap ever to be seen on screen. Some might beg to differ but I don't. While I hated that she killed Maureen, that story was crafted so well from start to finish. I hated the fact that we lost the Grand Dame of daytime, Bev McKinsey, in this era too and we had plenty of dud characters, but GL was must see TV. Jill might suck at getting rid of the right/wrong characters but GL in this era had some of the best lighting, music, and sets on TV. Jill gets the production side down to a "T" but she sucks at everything else.

I didn't mind Rauch or Conboy's era that much because I did still enjoy the show up until that point, but for me, they didn't match up to the JFP years.

Rauch's years focused too heavily on Reva and Annie, and while I loved both characters, i preferred characters like Vanessa and Holly, who were practically given scraps in that era. And I didn't like how Roger, my favorite GL character of all time, was recast and written out stupidly under Rauch's reign. But I can't complain because that era was the start of my beloved "Manny" (JBL's Michelle & Danny). And I liked the Santos clan on GL along with other characters like Drew, Selina, and Ben.

Conboy's era was alright too b/c I loved Tony and Marah. Blake and Ross were driving story. I liked Cassie & Richard. But I feel that this era was the beginning of the drop of production (IMO) as the sets started looking cheaper, and history was tossed out the window (Mary Ann Carruthers saga).

And don't get me started on Ellen.... She'll forever go down as the worst EP in soap history beside her "teacher," Chris Goutman (AW & ATWT).

Now anything I see pre-91 on Youtube is good with me. Sheer classic. I tend to enjoy it all, even stories that I've read were unfavorable by fans (i.e. the Paul Valere story or Tamerlain/Spaulding saga). I'd kill though if someone had stories from the 70s. Reading synopsis, I bet the writing and production was simple but stellar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I thought Blake and Ross were on the backburner during Conboy.

For me GL just lost so much of its heart under JFP. I'm not sure how I'd feel if I was watching now, when I'm more jaded. I think a lot depends on how you felt about her favorite characters. I hated most of them (Nick, Buzz, Lucy) so that put me in a bad spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So did I.

Same. I was fine with Buzz, b/c I happen to be a Justin Deas fan. But, you know, even with Buzz, a little bit always could have gone a long way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It was a PG thing...and the network, that demanded the changes. I have to say, I would agree with replacing RM as Chele...not that she wasnt talented but she would not have been able to carry a traditional soap romantic pairing..so Chele would be sidelined as a frumpy best friend...(take it that I don't agree with who they recast with or what was written for Michele aftewards, I am just saying I can see why they did it.) I remember watching "Bully," and yellling at the TV..."Stop that Michelle Bauer and go put some clothes on!" like a nut so my partners asked..."Who is this Michele Bauer actress and why do you care if she is taking her clothes off."

Also to be blunt, the Billy younger actor was not that great of an actor and mumbled his lines.

But I do agree that Laibson's GL was dark but that came from non other then our beloved McTrash!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member




  • Recent Posts

    • I'm not sure it's as unpopular as you think.  I just think the show knew they were in a bind, and needed a proven couple for the viewers to invest in. Trying to reunite Vanessa and Ross had just failed in 87. I don't think Ed and Holly's affair was well received, as Simon and Garrett had a brother/sister chemistry. Enter Billy and Vanessa, who give you history and an out not to try and do a Josh/Reva/Billy triangle, which would've really wrecked the relationship between Josh and Billy. I'd have been ok with trying Vanessa/Ross again, and doing a Vanessa/Ross/Holly/Billy quad for a while. I hated Nadine. HATED. She had to be the most insufferable also-ran before ATWT's Julia Lindsay. This is where I wish I knew Roger's history better.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • GROSS. Michael Swan was hot back in his ATWT days. Now he's 76 and WAY past his hot years.    
    • Since she kidnapped, locked up and tried to kill her father's wife I'd say that is still a pretty big deal
    • I'm good with the gushing, too. There aren't many soap icons like John Black, and that's important to celebrate and remember. And yes, life does go on for other characters, but as they say, timing is everything. Going sky diving the day before the funeral? And during a week of shows that were so powerful emotionally? No.    
    • No. There might have been a slight pause for dramatic effect after his "death," but pretty soon after they showed him in France getting plastic surgery and getting involved with his doctor, then planning with her to bring Christina to France. (She thought he had good reason to do it; she wasn't a bad person or anything). Now that I think of it, there must have been some kind of pause before that, during the 70s. Rita was accused of killing a private patient for an inheritance when she lived in Texas. Part of the backstory was that Roger had been there, too. Not sure exactly when or how long that was.
    • I've already stated that I don't like Doug being written as this meek and submissive. It was so lame watching him leave her like that. Vanessa can divorce him, but she then needs to get her thot ass into therapy. She's not only having sex with every guy she runs into, but is now having  sex with a skeevy perv on a poker table. I'm going to give the BTG some credit here. For months, many on this board were delighting in the Vanessa/Joey flirting and what they saw as chemistry. I think we're now seeing what the writers always intended -- that Joey is a disgusting POS wannabe mobster.
    • John Black actually was the ultimate good guy soap hero. So I don’t mind the town gushing over him. It’s deserved.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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