Jump to content

Guiding Light Discussion Thread


Paul Raven

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I wondered if you were really saying DK! 

David Forsyth is a great suggestion. I know he could play it. Personally I was not fond of Gentry. If only we could tweak the past. 

There was a meme that went around that said that the Bennifer wedding reset the timeline to 2004. With that set of circumstances what would you change? 

On GL I would fire Bradley & Frank & keep Jerry on contract. Also when everyone but Kim took the pay cut I would've fired Kim. (Unfair to the others not to.) I would've done away with both the island principality & the mob. (Gotta fire David, too, no need for Edmund.) Danny Santos would be discovered to be a long lost grandson of Mike Bauer. I would've recast Rachel Miner & Bryan Buffington. There would never have been a Grady or a Cyrus. I would have never hired Marty West. There would have been no baseball diamond set. Ellen Weston would have never been propped by co-HWs. I don't care how much fun Carrie Nye was BTS, there would have been no Maryanne Carruthers story. It goes without saying the words "sock puppet" would never be uttered. I would still tell the stories of Otalia & Jami. OH! Ben Reade, not a sex worker & no suicide. Find a way to keep Aubrey Dollar. 

 

So, 2004, what would you change? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I remember a couple of the soap magazines suggested Gil Gerard was being considered as an Ed recast.  But I have no idea what his physical condition (and appearance) was at that time. It may have been a rumor or someone's wishful casting, but I did see it in print.  David Forsyth had the acting chops, but he seemed to young to play Ed, in my opinion.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree! While I'm glad that the actors and crew got to work for another year-and-a-half or so, I have to wonder if the end result was worth it. Maybe it would have been better to be unemployed than have your name attached to the inferior product that Guiding Light became during the Peapack era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think most actors would rather have the job. I don't really believe there was a huge industry stigma attached to Peapack. To most people, GL was a show their mother or grandmother watched, and not something still on the air in 2009. I don't hear Murray Bartlett going around saying that filming on the cheap for a year hurt his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And, it's not just the actors. Also crew, staff, etc. I agree that they didn't suffer from some stigma. Yes, they did suffer because they worked under hardship conditions. And, I believe working with the threat of cancellation carries a serious level of stress, too. But, when push comes to shove, obviously people would choose to continue working. In fact, they actually did choose to. And there was an article, either 2007 or 2008, that indicated that GL was the only soap making money. Clearly, that's a double-edged sword. They were working on such a hardship budget, on the cheap, that that is what it took to be profitable. Yikes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, I guess you're right, considering the fact that even I wasn't watching in 2009: I recently viewed the Peapack era on YouTube. The thing is, I used to watch GL (and the whole CBS daytime line-up) with my grandmother, so it was kind of tough to see one of the shows we looked at together go out like that.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree.  Peapack was an embarrassment for everyone concerned.  Nevertheless, a lot of people were depending on its' success in order to maintain their livelihoods. 

In the end, you can't fault anyone responsible for trying to do whatever they could to keep GL going and keep everyone employed.  They just needed more competent leaders at the helm.

Gil Gerard would have made for a better Clint Buchanan recast on OLTL.

I, myself, would have reached out to Mart Hulswit to see whether he were interested in returning to the show.  He might not have been a hunk, but I think Ed was past being a romantic lead anyway.  Plus, having him there with Maureen Garrett as Holly might have made the Sebastian storyline less absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can respect that. To be honest, any shame that I think my family would have felt with what GL had become had already happened. For me, anything after the decision to claim Ben was sexually abused and being sexually abused made him a serial killer was just not going to reach such a low...although goodness knows they tried with that incest-loving hambone Jonathan, Cassie's kid who electrified his father and got lots of closeups looking pouty to make sure we knew he was evil, and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You remember the speculation that Stuart Damon was being considered as an Ed Bauer recast?  I would've liked to see Mart return in the role as that tied into GL's past.

Absolutely.  If they couldn't have gotten GA back, they should've made a call to John Bolger.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's silly to have an "off-screen" Phillip being an elusive boogey-man.  It's bad storytelling.  Let other players share the spotlight, but that story was weak.  They never should've revealed Phillip was alive until they were able to show him on-screen- it was so stupid. Show, don't tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I never understood why they made Phillip into the Big Bad both in his exit and then offscreen, had him invisibly stalking his family and friends for several years as they struggled to get GA back, etc. and then when he does show up he is mostly fine! Very little is mentioned of his psychotic break or all the crazy stuff he's pulled both before and after his 'death!' Except for one thing, when he literally throws that creep Grady off a cliff and no one ever finds out! They just go back to more folk-rock scenes of Phillip strolllng the dilapidated streets and bonding with people! WTF?!

Edited by Vee
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   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • A kind angel has added both episodes to the vault (UK Diva TV broadcast version). 
    • Yes, I think that is the most likely situation.  TPTB were unhappy with the offer(s) they got from the tourism board in Finland, and decided the trip was going to be too expensive for P&G/NBC to finance alone.   I would also speculate a similar situation likely occurred a few years later with the planned location shoot in Egypt, which was also cancelled after the storyline had already started, and changed to Arizona.  
    • What else? #May4th

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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