Guiding Light discussion thread

[DRW50]

There were moments here and there, but I'm talking about what really set the cancellation in motion. And for me that was JFP. The show was extremely close to being taken off the air by 1995.

[Broderick]

I guess they filmed where they could do it cheaply, but I always thought Newark or Hoboken could have given them a more "urban" feel like the Springfield we'd often seen on TV, given them a greater variety of places to shoot, and also provided them with some parks and rural spots if they wanted to show people drifting aimlessly in front of a snowbank or an algae-covered pond.  

[j swift]

But, can we all agree that the idea of filming in an actual space is intriguing, it just shouldn't have been applied to GL? 

Yet, I still think about the final weeks with Lilian's monologue about her sacrifices and Alan's death on the bench as being top-notch soap.  And it didn't matter where it was filmed or how it looked.

Edited December 4, 2023 by j swift

[Broderick]

Honestly, I think it offered a good lesson about what to do (and what not to do).   Find a space that resembles your actual show, practice with the cameras first so that you don't zoom into nose hairs, don't drown out the actors with bad music, be careful with the make-up so you aren't filming corpse-like zombies, don't have everyone ambling about aimlessly like frost-bitten vagabonds, and resist the temptation to make the whole town look frigid & condemned.  

[Khan]

No.

I'm fine with regular, on-location shoots for primetime (network/cable/streaming) shows, but daytime drama is a different animal.  For many, it's the closest we'll ever come to watching live theater (four-camera sitcoms notwithstanding).  

[Vee]

I think the British/Euro/Australian, etc. soaps do well with filming both outdoors and on location. I've always coveted Eastenders' use of exterior work. But those soaps also have a lot more money to work with, and frankly a lot more investment BTS. It's telling that the PP soaps' location work, not that far removed from Peapack geographically, looked a lot better because time and money were used to light and shoot properly.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Vee

[Khan]

I agree.  1993-94 was the last time when GL entertained me on a consistent basis.  After that, the show tended to be hit-and-miss for me, with good stories happening less and less frequently as time went on.  (It rallied somewhat during the tail end of '97 and into '98, but even that period was marked by dumbed-down, simplistic writing that was catering more to couples 'shippers and people who thought Carrie slugging Sami at the altar on DAYS was the golden era of soap operas).  By the time Ellen Wheeler was named EP, if you were still watching GL, it was strictly out of loyalty (and a need for self-punishment).

Edited December 4, 2023 by Khan

[j swift]

And it's not a 1:1 comparison because Eastenders uses an outdoor set, not naturalistic surroundings, so they can still control variables like lighting and sound in ways that they were incapable of doing in New Jersey.

Eastenders is much more like when DAYS built a mall on the Radford lot.

[kalbir]

As we saw in the 1980s ratings thread, GL avoided cancel territory because Capitol showed no growth and B&B wasn't a hit right away.

That year from the aftermath of Maureen's death to Nancy Curlee departure was a chore to get through. Not long after that was OJ. 

GL entered cancel territory in 1995. JFP was gone in May that year.

[Khan]

Also, Pamela K. Long kept her job as HW for as long as she did the second time, because, while GL didn't gain many viewers during that time, it didn't lose that many either.  That's what makes Nancy Curlee and her work on GL so remarkable, IMO.  She was probably the first HW since Douglas Marland to bring viewers to GL, or to bring them back.  If JFP and P&G had not interfered in their own, respective ways, it's very likely that Curlee could have brought GL back into the Top 3.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Khan

[j swift]

Looking at the early 90s, does GL ever benefit from the chaos at GH with Monty 2.0, or the cancelation of Santa Barbara?  I always wonder if the average daytime fan (not like those of us who would still discuss the show decades later) would actually change soaps, or just abandon the one that they no longer enjoy?

[kalbir]

From the annual ratings, there is an increase from 1990/91 to 1991/92. How that's translated on a weekly basis we'll be seeing soon in the 1990s ratings thread.

[Khan]

In terms of gaining viewers from the other shows?  Probably not.  As you've said, @j swift, the average soap fan probably wouldn't be tempted to change soaps or sample a "new" one after abandoning their favorite unless they were extremely tempted to do so.  IOW, if you ain't happy with how GH or SaBa is going and you quit, you probably aren't going to try out GL as a substitute.  More than likely, if that's the only soap you're following, then you'll probably stop watching soaps altogether.

I do think it's interesting, though, that, after years of trying to compete with GH and losing, SaBa, toward the very end of its' run, made a concerted effort to go after GL's audience instead, hiring both Pamela K. Long and Kim Zimmer to lure fans over to their show.  Of course, the ploy didn't work: SaBa fans, or what was left of them, felt the show becoming unrecognizable; and GL fans weren't interested enough to switch over to SaBa either.

[kalbir]

Of course JFP brought over her friends from Santa Barbara: Justin Deas, Marcy Walker, Marj Dusay. 

One casting during JFP run I'm curious about is Alan return in Summer 1994. It's surprising that GL cast a virtual unknown actor in such a pivotal role (at least to daytime viewers anyway; I know Ron Raines was a musical theater actor before he was cast on GL) and not a big soap name. Maybe the friend JFP wanted for the part wasn't available or not interested.

Edited December 5, 2023 by kalbir

[Khan]

I've wondered about that myself.  Another EP, recognizing the importance of a character like Alan Spaulding to GL, would have held out for a "name" actor.  (I, myself, might have approached Larry Hagman.  Hey, all he could do was say "no," right, lol?).  Even Paul Rauch knew he had to "go big or go home" when it came to bringing back Alexandra again, so he landed Dame Joan Collins (a startling move that, unfortunately, did not work out as most had hoped).  So, why would JFP settle for someone like Ron Raines - who was, IMO, never suited to playing Alan - unless Raines was a second choice and the actor she likely wanted - Jed Allan? Nicolas Coster? - turned her down?