GL now joins some illustrious company in the cancelled soap thread.

Let's share memories and ask questions here.

2 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Excellent point. Especially regarding Michelle. 

Wait. I don't know about this. Can you expand? 

It was in Allan's episode about Mo's death with Parker, Sloan, Kincaid and the Chele actress.

7 hours ago, NothinButAttitude said:

it should've been a sign to JFP that maybe the choice she was about to make (getting rid of Ellen Parker) was stupid and would forever damage (not only GL) but the entire genre. 

GL being a community-based show needed to have an anchor/tentpole character to keep things grounded, and JFP didn't realize that.

Aftermath of Maureen death until Nancy Curlee departure was a chore for me to get through. GL was not in a very good place creatively at the start of OJ and I'd go as far as to say it was effectively over in the aftermath of OJ.

4 hours ago, Mitch64 said:

 

, but would Roger let Michelle think her Mom was dead?

×

Of course he would. He let Blake think he was dead for 15 years or so, didn't he?  Mo would've had to have amnesia, of course...but Roger would've done it in a heartbeat for any number of motives. 

Random thought---imagine Vanessa being the first to find an amnesiac Mo and having to work with Roger to help Mo get her memory back. *sniff* Hence, the "I'd do anything for you," line.

, but would Roger let Michelle think her Mom was dead?

It's sad that Tina Sloan knew immediately (as did Nancy Curlee) that getting rid of Ellen Parker was a colossal mistake. That JFP didn't and then has spent decades changing her stories about it says everything about her and her role in daytime (and has also sidestepped McKinsey's accusations of unfair workplace conditions as well in the process). JFP always talks about "drama" but I notice she never talks about heart or emotion. That's what these producers removed from the soaps as they went from soap to soap. They took away the heart; they removed the tentpole characters who meant something from the audiences. They don't think long-term because they are too busy going after short-term fixes. I get it's about all short-term rating increases, but they did not nothing but create damage. I can't speak to GL after Maureen's death because I did not watch daily after that for a long while. I never saw her death. As a child, I saw her walk out the door, and I stopped watching. I kept up with SOD summaries, but it never looked interesting. GL felt like a shell of itself. Perhaps, I'm wrong. 

19 minutes ago, chrisml said:

It's sad that Tina Sloan knew immediately (as did Nancy Curlee) that getting rid of Ellen Parker was a colossal mistake. That JFP didn't and then has spent decades changing her stories about it says everything about her and her role in daytime (and has also sidestepped McKinsey's accusations of unfair workplace conditions as well in the process). JFP always talks about "drama" but I notice she never talks about heart or emotion. That's what these producers removed from the soaps as they went from soap to soap. They took away the heart; they removed the tentpole characters who meant something from the audiences. They don't think long-term because they are too busy going after short-term fixes. I get it's about all short-term rating increases, but they did not nothing but create damage. I can't speak to GL after Maureen's death because I did not watch daily after that for a long while. I never saw her death. As a child, I saw her walk out the door, and I stopped watching. I kept up with SOD summaries, but it never looked interesting. GL felt like a shell of itself. Perhaps, I'm wrong. 

You're right. I believed then and I believe now that JFP had no interest in soaps, and may have been outright ashamed of them, similar to Guza, Pratt, etc. She compared AW to ER, Cheers, and NYPD Blue. 

No show rests on one character. GL could have survived without Maureen if the show had been in a better place. Unfortunately, what Maureen represented is what JFP, and many others, saw as meaningless and boring. I remember when JFP used to say she had actually built up Maureen's role on the canvas in order to kill her off, and that's the only reason viewers were upset. So essentially, the only reason JFP had any sense of heart, community, or family on GL was to snuff it out for viewers to get upset. And this was something to brag about.

5 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

You're right. I believed then and I believe now that JFP had no interest in soaps, and may have been outright ashamed of them, similar to Guza, Pratt, etc. She compared AW to ER, Cheers, and NYPD Blue. 

 

there are so many examples, but this one really illustrates that point. 

in her locher room interview, she had the audacity to compare herself to steven bochco. she was address the ‘friends of jlll’ issue and said something along the lines that ‘well, bochco had his stable of actors, so why shouldn’t she.’ 

well, jill, yes, bochco often brought to people into his shows — BUT THEY WERE NEW SHOWS! — not soaps that had been on the air for decades, where viewers were emotionally invested in characters and who resented when those characters were pushed aside for jll’s favorites. 

while this is a rather blatant example, it perfectly illustrates how the people in charge of making — and fixing — soaps have absolutely no understanding of why viewers watch soaps.  

 

9 minutes ago, wonderwoman1951 said:

there are so many examples, but this one really illustrates that point. 

in her locher room interview, she had the audacity to compare herself to steven bochco. she was address the ‘friends of jlll’ issue and said something along the lines that ‘well, bochco had his stable of actors, so why shouldn’t she.’ 

well, jill, yes, bochco often brought to people into his shows — BUT THEY WERE NEW SHOWS! — not soaps that had been on the air for decades, where viewers were emotionally invested in characters and who resented when those characters were pushed aside for jll’s favorites. 

while this is a rather blatant example, it perfectly illustrates how the people in charge of making — and fixing — soaps have absolutely no understanding of why viewers watch soaps.  

Even worse, she did not bother to properly introduce these actors beyond assuming people would love them because she loved them. She did such a bad job that even Vincent Irizarry, who had been popular with GL fans almost a decade before JFP's arrival, got a mediocre/poor response. 

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

You're right. I believed then and I believe now that JFP had no interest in soaps, and may have been outright ashamed of them, similar to Guza, Pratt, etc. She compared AW to ER, Cheers, and NYPD Blue. 

This always bothered me. There are tons of people at the height of daytime, who would've loved to have written for the genre (many of us on this forum included). However, you had people who looked down on the genre and only did it for a "job." If she (along with Pratt, Guza, etc.) felt they belonged in primetime, they should've went for those jobs and made connections. I never understood why Pratt and Guza returned to daytime when they wrote for many of Aaron Spelling's primetime shows. 

Just now, NothinButAttitude said:

This always bothered me. There are tons of people at the height of daytime, who would've loved to have written for the genre (many of us on this forum included). However, you had people who looked down on the genre and only did it for a "job." If she (along with Pratt, Guza, etc.) felt they belonged in primetime, they should've went for those jobs and made connections. I never understood why Pratt and Guza returned to daytime when they wrote for many of Aaron Spelling's primetime shows. 

They flunked out in primetime. They had to go to soaps. They never got over the resentment. It was all about them. Even their publicity photos dripped ego.

4 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

They flunked out in primetime. They had to go to soaps. They never got over the resentment. It was all about them. Even their publicity photos dripped ego.

Sadly, I hate there is a trail of dead soaps that had to fall victim to their resentment. 

3 hours ago, P.J. said:

Of course he would. He let Blake think he was dead for 15 years or so, didn't he?  Mo would've had to have amnesia, of course...but Roger would've done it in a heartbeat for any number of motives. 

Random thought---imagine Vanessa being the first to find an amnesiac Mo and having to work with Roger to help Mo get her memory back. *sniff* Hence, the "I'd do anything for you," line.

There  are certain things you just don't hear said except in soap circles. Here is one example. The question  being pondered is whether Mo would go along with her daughter thinking she was dead. AND ONLY ON A SOAP would the answer be of course she would but Mo would have to have amnesia.!

5 hours ago, chrisml said:

It's sad that Tina Sloan knew immediately (as did Nancy Curlee) that getting rid of Ellen Parker was a colossal mistake. That JFP didn't and then has spent decades changing her stories about it says everything about her and her role in daytime (and has also sidestepped McKinsey's accusations of unfair workplace conditions as well in the process). JFP always talks about "drama" but I notice she never talks about heart or emotion. That's what these producers removed from the soaps as they went from soap to soap. They took away the heart; they removed the tentpole characters who meant something from the audiences. They don't think long-term because they are too busy going after short-term fixes. I get it's about all short-term rating increases, but they did not nothing but create damage. I can't speak to GL after Maureen's death because I did not watch daily after that for a long while. I never saw her death. As a child, I saw her walk out the door, and I stopped watching. I kept up with SOD summaries, but it never looked interesting. GL felt like a shell of itself. Perhaps, I'm wrong. 

A few things. Tina is such a fine wonderful person BUT she is also one very quick, perceptive person with a great deal of insight generally speaking. Now I'm going to switch from real to reel. I always felt so bad for Lillian in this & she suffered real remorse & paid dearly. Contrast that to Ed who I've always thought was pretty untouched by guilt & who definitely skated on the affair!! Unfair!! 

 

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

You're right. I believed then and I believe now that JFP had no interest in soaps, and may have been outright ashamed of them, similar to Guza, Pratt, etc. She compared AW to ER, Cheers, and NYPD Blue. 

No show rests on one character. GL could have survived without Maureen if the show had been in a better place. Unfortunately, what Maureen represented is what JFP, and many others, saw as meaningless and boring. I remember when JFP used to say she had actually built up Maureen's role on the canvas in order to kill her off, and that's the only reason viewers were upset. So essentially, the only reason JFP had any sense of heart, community, or family on GL was to snuff it out for viewers to get upset. And this was something to brag about.

And, I thought it was a laughable comment since fans adored Maureen & had no need for JFP to somehow school them in what Springfield citizen they should have affection for.

Ed's marriage to Maureen was his 4th. It was time he settled with into married life and have Ed and Maureen function as the matriach/patriach to  family and friends. There could still be stories for them and plenty of airtime. Killing off Maureen left him in limbo. 

Better that Bea be killed off and Maureen move into the senior role for the Reardons.

Bring back Nola,Tony etc and restore the Reardons as a core family as Marland intended.

DRW50, I think you're right that JFP wanted to be in the nighttime realm. She gutted AW so it could be the next ER. She even turned its opening into a ridiculous copy of ER.  JFP will never take responsibility for anything in any of the retrospective interviews, and at this point, it doesn't matter, but my word, the amount of sexism and misogyny that followed her from soap to soap. I also didn't expect Locher or anyone else for that matter to really address what McKinsey has claimed in her interview witj Logan after her departure.

I do wonder what the "friends of Jill" thought of the label especially the ones that suffered because of it. I know Marcy Walker loathed JFP after the GL experience as she felt used to keep JFP's job on the show. 

2 hours ago, chrisml said:

DRW50, I think you're right that JFP wanted to be in the nighttime realm. She gutted AW so it could be the next ER. She even turned its opening into a ridiculous copy of ER.  JFP will never take responsibility for anything in any of the retrospective interviews, and at this point, it doesn't matter, but my word, the amount of sexism and misogyny that followed her from soap to soap. I also didn't expect Locher or anyone else for that matter to really address what McKinsey has claimed in her interview witj Logan after her departure.

I do wonder what the "friends of Jill" thought of the label especially the ones that suffered because of it. I know Marcy Walker loathed JFP after the GL experience as she felt used to keep JFP's job on the show. 

The opening she spent some big bucks on that the show could ill afford at that time was completely derivative, yes, but not just of ER, of two primetime shows, ER and NYPD Blue, both from the look as well as the distinctive percussion. At the same time spending even more money she stuck the show with this downtown block set with the hospital, the cop shop, the newspaper & Carlino's Restaurant, forcing most of the stories to be told in one or more of those 4 settings & her stated reason for foisting this set on the show was because she said she couldn't understand what was where in the previous traditional sets. ?????