4 minutes ago, chrisml said:

I know most everyone hates Ellen Weston, but I think Ellen Weston could have worked with a producer who had a history with the show and/or sensitivity to character-based storylines. The Maryanne story had some intriguing episodes even if the story was absurd and an insult to GL history. Weston was at least trying to tell an umbrella story that included these actors and she wanted to give them something meaty to do. I'm not disputing that it made it no sense. I was never grabbed by anything in Wheeler's tenure. From what little I watched, it was an odd mixture of tawdry, mean-spirited, and moralistic. 

For example??? 

And, about Ellen Weston, from me all there is or ever could be is a HARD PASS. 

She didn't even know how to be interviewed as a writer. You simply do not rewrite the backstories of 5 veteran male characters accusing them of no other than cold-blooded murder. And sock puppet? GMAB!!! Trying to tell story? In whose universe?! I'll give you mean-spirited, the death of Ben Reade? How much meaner could it have been?

 

 

Edited February 13Feb 13 by Contessa Donatella

5 hours ago, chrisml said:

I know most everyone hates Ellen Weston, but I think Ellen Weston could have worked with a producer who had a history with the show and/or sensitivity to character-based storylines. The Maryanne story had some intriguing episodes even if the story was absurd and an insult to GL history. Weston was at least trying to tell an umbrella story that included these actors and she wanted to give them something meaty to do. I'm not disputing that it made it no sense. I was never grabbed by anything in Wheeler's tenure. From what little I watched, it was an odd mixture of tawdry, mean-spirited, and moralistic. 

Honestly, having the girls threatened by some common, unknown enemy of the men wasn't a bad idea. I always thought that each of the men, having one piece of the puzzle but not knowing the others were involved (aside from Josh and Billy of course) could've worked. 

Part of the reason the Eli Simms story worked (although I understand the criticisms of it) was that only one of the men really had an established history on the show. 

11 minutes ago, P.J. said:

Honestly, having the girls threatened by some common, unknown enemy of the men wasn't a bad idea. I always thought that each of the men, having one piece of the puzzle but not knowing the others were involved (aside from Josh and Billy of course) could've worked. 

Part of the reason the Eli Simms story worked (although I understand the criticisms of it) was that only one of the men really had an established history on the show. 

But the Eli Simms story did not work!  Aside from the fact that it was well crafted (but full of historical inaccuracies).  The Eli Simms plot implied that all five of those old men had been in or near Springfield 25 years earlier -- which the history of Bill Bauer and HB Lewis (at least) told us was not true.   

The Maryanne plot was basically a re-tread of Eli Simms. A story which implied that four or five middle-aged men (current characters on the show) had all been in Springfield 25 years earlier, which the audience knew was impossible. Every single one of those men had moved to Springfield at different times, over the former 25 years.  It was a decent plot, but it conflicted with the history of the show.   Square peg in a round hole, so to speak.    

13 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

But the Eli Simms story did not work!  Aside from the fact that it was well crafted (but full of historical inaccuracies).  The Eli Simms plot implied that all five of those old men had been in or near Springfield 25 years earlier -- which the history of Bill Bauer and HB Lewis (at least) told us was not true.   

The Maryanne plot was basically a re-tread of Eli Simms. A story which implied that four or five middle-aged men (current characters on the show) had all been in Springfield 25 years earlier, which the audience knew was impossible. Every single one of those men had moved to Springfield at different times, over the former 25 years.  It was a decent plot, but it conflicted with the history of the show.   Square peg in a round hole, so to speak.    

You are all overlooking that they did this because Carrie Nye was a friend who they wanted to give work to. That is oversimplifying but it is also true.

 

10 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

But the Eli Simms story did not work!  Aside from the fact that it was well crafted (but full of historical inaccuracies).  The Eli Simms plot implied that all five of those old men had been in or near Springfield 25 years earlier -- which the history of Bill Bauer and HB Lewis (at least) told us was not true.   

The Maryanne plot was basically a re-tread of Eli Simms. A story which implied that four or five middle-aged men (current characters on the show) had all been in Springfield 25 years earlier, which the audience knew was impossible. Every single one of those men had moved to Springfield at different times, over the former 25 years.  It was a decent plot, but it conflicted with the history of the show.   Square peg in a round hole, so to speak.    

The only character's history really "tweaked" was Bill Bauer's. (in the 50's I'm not even sure where Guiding Light takes place, is it still in Selby Flats?)  Tom and Brandon were never really characters on the show. Henry had only been on the show for three years. HB was just starting. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say HB's history wasn't true.

Yes, there were logic problems. And they really should've popped for younger actors to stand in for the characters. (I'm not sure why the character's sons couldn't have all stood in for their fathers as Henry's voice over told the tale. Only having Greg Beecroft portray the Reardon patriarch was strange. The fuzzy focus thing detracted from the story.) But it wasn't nearly as egregious as rewriting Billy, Josh, Ed and Alan's pasts. Buzz having had a new face could've been used, but was apparently forgotten.

7 minutes ago, P.J. said:

The only character's history really "tweaked" was Bill Bauer's. (in the 50's I'm not even sure where Guiding Light takes place, is it still in Selby Flats?)  Tom and Brandon were never really characters on the show. Henry had only been on the show for three years. HB was just starting. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say HB's history wasn't true.

Yes, there were logic problems. And they really should've popped for younger actors to stand in for the characters. (I'm not sure why the character's sons couldn't have all stood in for their fathers as Henry's voice over told the tale. Only having Greg Beecroft portray the Reardon patriarch was strange. The fuzzy focus thing detracted from the story.) But it wasn't nearly as egregious as rewriting Billy, Josh, Ed and Alan's pasts. Buzz having had a new face could've been used, but was apparently forgotten.

HB was from Tulsa, and there had been no indication in Josh's history that his father had ever set foot in Springfield. And yes, the Bauers were in Selby Flats, California until around 1966.  Plus, it's ludicrous to suggest that middle-class Bill Bauer was hanging around with three millionaires (HB, Henry, and Brandon) in the 1950s, regardless of their respective locations.  Additionally, it had already been established that none of those families had been acquainted until they all ended up in Springfield by the early 1980s.     

If you want to grasp for straws in order to believe that storyline, go ahead.  But I choose not to do that.    

54 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

You are all overlooking that they did this because Carrie Nye was a friend who they wanted to give work to. That is oversimplifying but it is also true.

 

But that is not storyline related.  Hiring a well known actress, even if she is a friend, does not over-ride the canon of the show.  And if it does, the entire show is booed, screwed, tattooed, and barbecued.  

We had people going through paintings. A gum smacking cigarette girl. A fictional South American country with no real South American characters of note. We had Amish Reva. Wasting Marcy Walker for two years. We had what happened to Michael Zaslow bts and in the press.  If we're going to just stick with the Conboy Era, drug-dealing Alexandra is more offensive.  I don't think the Carrie Nye storyline was any more egregious or insulting to fans.

19 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

HB was from Tulsa, and there had been no indication in Josh's history that his father had ever set foot in Springfield. And yes, the Bauers were in Selby Flats, California until around 1966.  Plus, it's ludicrous to suggest that middle-class Bill Bauer was hanging around with three millionaires (HB, Henry, and Brandon) in the 1950s, regardless of their respective locations.  Additionally, it had already been established that none of those families had been acquainted until they all ended up in Springfield by the early 1980s.     

If you want to grasp for straws in order to believe that storyline, go ahead.  But I choose not to do that.    

Well, that's not exactly accurate---it had been established that Henry knew Brandon and was a mentor of teenage Alan's since Henry arrived in town. Henry and HB's relationship had also been established, and in fact, HB had attended meetings at Spaulding (off-screen) as far back as 1981. It's part of the reason Josh arrived in town---to act as liason between Lewis and Spaulding.

Edited February 14Feb 14 by P.J.

15 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

HB was from Tulsa, and there had been no indication in Josh's history that his father had ever set foot in Springfield. And yes, the Bauers were in Selby Flats, California until around 1966.  Plus, it's ludicrous to suggest that middle-class Bill Bauer was hanging around with three millionaires (HB, Henry, and Brandon) in the 1950s, regardless of their respective locations.  Additionally, it had already been established that none of those families had been acquainted until they all ended up in Springfield by the early 1980s.     

If you want to grasp for straws in order to believe that storyline, go ahead.  But I choose not to do that.    

But that is not storyline related.  Hiring a well known actress, even if she is a friend, does not over-ride the canon of the show.  And if it does, the entire show is booed, screwed, tattooed, and barbecued.  

I simply disagree here. To me it is obviously related to the particular writing. But, I have already made serious criticism about how this story obscenely accuses 5 male characters of doing something they did not do & could not have done.

Barbara Rodell as the serene Leslie #2 (not counting Kathryn Hays' fill-in) and then as the deranged Joyce Colman on ATWT is night and day. What a talent. I'd forgotten she was the last Lee Randolph on AW too.

OTOH you can see why Lynne Adams was so popular as Leslie in the '66 Nixon episodes online - she is ethereal, whip-smart and very youthful, whereas she comes off considerably different in her return debut in '73.

Edited February 14Feb 14 by Vee

On 2/12/2025 at 7:31 PM, AMCOLTLLover said:

was too Young for the 80‘s and 90‘s but I Loved 83 Where I started when I got my First GL Dvd‘s. I’m surprised Some Say This Is the Starting Point of the decline. I mean the Four Musketeers, The Lewis Clan, Kelly +  Claire Ramsey, Early Reva, Eli Simms and Tony Reardon+Annabelle Adventures, Bradley Raines, Alan-Phillip‘s Story. There was so much going on and everyone was involved and it really had a strong Community feel and a lot of those cast changes helped that show in my opinion. But it started to Change drastically Late 84.

Perfectly said.  I know people don't like the change (and there were too many) but Long had all the families in play, the Spauldings with their dysfunction, the Lewis with their rowdiness and crassness as contrast to...everyone else, the Bauers the center of it all and their Reardon's brining the blue collar warmth even as they argued as a big family does. New characters like Reva and Alex and India, etc. Then it all fell apart and it became a show about people in shoulder pads and big hair and a show that was kind of eccentric, all over the place, and warm, became a cold show, and a copy of...some other show. 

2 minutes ago, Mitch64 said:

Perfectly said.  I know people don't like the change (and there were too many) but Long had all the families in play, the Spauldings with their dysfunction, the Lewis with their rowdiness and crassness as contrast to...everyone else, the Bauers the center of it all and their Reardon's brining the blue collar warmth even as they argued as a big family does. New characters like Reva and Alex and India, etc. Then it all fell apart and it became a show about people in shoulder pads and big hair and a show that was kind of eccentric, all over the place, and warm, became a cold show, and a copy of...some other show. 

Ya know I am of the opinion that at a certain point in soap history each show had its own unique identity & we definitely lost that & I think that was a huge mistake. When soaps began there was a great deal of similarity. So the excellent time I'm thinking of was a sweet spot. If only we could have maintained that.

11 hours ago, P.J. said:

Well, that's not exactly accurate---it had been established that Henry knew Brandon and was a mentor of teenage Alan's since Henry arrived in town. Henry and HB's relationship had also been established, and in fact, HB had attended meetings at Spaulding (off-screen) as far back as 1981. It's part of the reason Josh arrived in town---to act as liason between Lewis and Spaulding.

I stand corrected.  You are right, i guess the three millionaire men did have some history of knowing one another previously.  I had forgotten about all that.  So maybe this plot might have been believable to me, if only HB, Henry, and Brandon had been involved.  I still don't buy that the working-class Reardon father (was his name Tom?) would have been hanging around with three millionaires, unless he had been working for them.  Maybe as a fishing guide or something.  But as friends who would travel together, I just don't buy that.  And there is no way Bill Bauer would have fit into this group, for several reasons -- location being the most obvious.

Ultimately when discussing the Eli Simms plot or the Maryanne Curruthers plot, fans tend to decide whether or not they want to accept the historical inaccuracies, and then they look for reasons/evidence to either accept or not accept the storyline(s).  I fall on the side of not accepting it, so I find reasons the plot(s) doesn't work.  Those who want to accept it, look for reasons to do so.  That's totally okay with me.  

Putting all that aside, I did think the Eli Simms storyline was well conceived and well written. And it was a very interesting plot. Who ever thought of it (Pam Long?) was a very talented writer.  But I simply can't get beyond the rewrites of history it took to bring it to the air.  If other are able to get beyond that, then that's totally cool with me.  Just differences of opinion and perspective.   

10 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

  And there is no way Bill Bauer would have fit into this group, for several reasons -- location being the most obvious.

Please don't misunderstand me. I hated the Eli Simms storyline because of its revisionist history and, yes, Bill Bauer was in Selby Flats in the 50s. However, Bill Bauer never actually moved to Springfield. Nor did any of the other characters. Selby Flats sort of just morphed into Springfield. It's as if the viewers were just supposed to believe that everything that happened previously on the show had happened in Springfield, not Selby Flats. The absurdist revisionism/dramatic license actually happened way back in the 60s. Historical accuracy had already left the building a long time before the Eli Simms story. Particularly in the realm of geography and setting. 

I thought that Tom Reardon was their fishing guide. And the fishing trip with Annie Sims happened in 1963, not the 1950s. There were frequent mentions of the event happening "20 years ago."